On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:39:36 -0500 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 21:18 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:11:52 +0900 > > FUJITA Tomonori <tomof@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:51:44 -0500 > > > Mike Christie <michaelc@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 07:36:26 -0700 > > > > > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 23:22 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > > > >>> On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 11:06:00 -0500 > > > > >>> James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 00:36 -0500, Mike Christie wrote: > > > > >>>>> Mike Christie wrote: > > > > >>>>>> Pete Wyckoff wrote: > > > > >>>>>>> I think this used not to happen; not sure. But I changed two things > > > > >>>>>> This most likely did not happen before 2.6.25-rc* or it broke in > > > > >>>>>> slightly different ways, because iscsi used to try and do > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> echo 1 > /sys/block/sdX/device/delete > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> from userspace instead of calling scsi_remove_target from the kernel. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> As you know around 2.6.21, the behavior of doing the echo to the delete > > > > >>>>>> file changed due to a driver model and scsi change and that broke the > > > > >>>>>> iscsi tools. The iscsi tools userspace removal was sort of hack in the > > > > >>>>>> first place and was racey, so we switched to removing devices/target > > > > >>>>>> like the FC class. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> lately. 2.6.25-rc1 to -rc4 and fedora 8 iscsi-initiator-utils (865) to > > > > >>>>>>> fedora devel (868). Bidi and varlen patches always too. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> I'll follow with some more variations on this theme. Looks like bsg > > > > >>>>>>> needs to protect more carefully against the device going away. Any > > > > >>>>>>> ideas how best to do this? What was the approach in sg? > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> I think sg is broken in similar ways. The iser guys have some tests > > > > >>>>>> cases that have broken sg while IO is outstanding. I am ccing Erez. > > > > >>>>> Actually one of the problems looks a little different than some of the > > > > >>>>> problems hit with sg and are caused because we remove the bsg device too > > > > >>>>> soon. I think we want to wait until all the references from the > > > > >>>>> commands/requests are released. The attached patch (untested) moves the > > > > >>>>> bsg unreg call to the scsi device release fn. > > > > >>>> Well, this fix is now upstream. However, it's causing all our > > > > >>>> scsi_devices never to get released, which is a serious regression. > > > > >>>> We're also doing spurious bsg_unregister_queue() for things that never > > > > >>>> actually registered one (all scan devices that return DID_NO_CONNECT), > > > > >>>> but bsg doesn't seem to be complaining about this. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> The essence of the problem is that bsg_register_queue() takes a ref to > > > > >>>> the sdev_gendev, so you can't move bsg_unregister_queue() into the > > > > >>>> release function because nothing ever puts bsg's device ref and so > > > > >>>> release is never called. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Options for fixing this before 2.6.25 are > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> 1. revert the patch > > > > >>>> 2. Do an additional put for the bsg reference in > > > > >>>> __scsi_remove_device (patch below). It's nasty but it preserves > > > > >>>> the semantics and does what you want > > > > >>> After some investigation, this patch doesn't fix the bug that Pete > > > > >>> reported (I'll send a new patch shortly). > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Can you revert the commit 4b6f5b3a993cbe34b4280f252bccc76967c185c8 > > > > >>> instead of merging this? > > > > >> Sure ... I didn't like the hack either. As long as iSCSI is fine with > > > > >> the reversion it's the quickest way to fix the problem. > > > > > > > > > > How about this? With the commit reversion, I confirmed that this patch > > > > > fixes the first bug that Pete reported: > > > > > > > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=120508166505141&w=2 > > > > > > > > > > I suspect that this could fix the rest too. > > > > > > > > > > = > > > > > From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Subject: [PATCH] bsg: takes a ref to struct device in fops->open > > > > > > > > > > bsg_register_queue() takes a ref to struct device that a caller > > > > > passes. For example, it takes a ref to the sdev_gendev with scsi > > > > > devices. However, bsg doesn't takes a ref to it in fops->open. So > > > > > while an application opens a bsg device, the scsi device that the bsg > > > > > device holds can go away (bsg also takes a ref to a queue, but it > > > > > doesn't prevent the device from going away). > > > > > > > > > > With this, bsg takes a ref to struct device in fops->open and frees it > > > > > in fops->release. > > > > > > > > > > Note that bsg doesn't need to takes a ref to a queue for SCSI devices > > > > > at least. I think that it would be better to remove the code but I let > > > > > it alone for now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why does bsg_add_device do kobject_get instead of blk_get_queue? > > > > > > I think that it's a bug. But both takes a ref to a queue (though > > > kobject_get doesn't see QUEUE_FLAG_DEAD), so I think that it's not > > > related with the current problems. > > > > > > > > > > It seems like if we added a blk_qet_queue when we opened the device and > > > > a blk_put_queue when bsg_release is called we could remove the > > > > get/put_device calls. I am not sure if that is cleaner or not. I was > > > > just thinking that bsg goes from bsg->request_queue->scsi_device so > > > > maybe it should not worry about the device. > > > > > > kobject_get takes a ref to a queue. If we don't take a ref to a > > > device, the scsi device has gone though the queue is still there > > > because the queue release is done from the device release. If the scsi > > > device has gone, we are dead, right? > > > > > > > > > Anyway, here's a patch to replace kobject_get with blk_get_queue. > > > > > > James, please apply this patch too. > > > > > > = > > > From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Subject: [PATCH] bsg: replace kobject_get with blk_get_queue > > > > Really sorry, please apply this one. > > > > = > > From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: [PATCH] bsg: replace kobject_get with blk_get_queue > > > > Both takes a ref to a queue. But blk_get_queue checks QUEUE_FLAG_DEAD > > and is more appropriate interface here. > > > > Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > This looks reasonable to me. It's probably a rc-fixes patch, so could I > get Jen's ack and some evidence of testing (and that it actually fixes > the bug). Do you mean that the patch to take a ref to strutc device (e.g. sdev_gendev for scsi devices) in fops->open is a reasonable fix? http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=120654365424916&w=2 The patch with the commit reversion fixes all the problems for me that Pete reported. Pete, can you test the patch? It's a rc-fixes patch, but I'm fine with applying it to scsi-misc (I'll send it to the stable tree later on). The patch has one bug in an error handling path (I should have used IS_ERR there). So I'll send an updated version shortly. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
