On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> When we tear down a device we try to flush all outstanding
> commands in scsi_free_queue(). However the check in
> scsi_request_fn() is imperfect as it only signals that
> we _might start_ aborting commands, not that we've actually
> aborted some.
> So move the printk inside the scsi_kill_request function,
> this will also give us a hint about which commands are aborted.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> index 06bc265..f85cfa6 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> @@ -1409,6 +1409,8 @@ static void scsi_kill_request(struct request *req, struct request_queue *q)
>
> blk_start_request(req);
>
> + scmd_printk(KERN_INFO, cmd, "killing request\n");
> +
> sdev = cmd->device;
> starget = scsi_target(sdev);
> shost = sdev->host;
> @@ -1490,7 +1492,6 @@ static void scsi_request_fn(struct request_queue *q)
> struct request *req;
>
> if (!sdev) {
> - printk("scsi: killing requests for dead queue\n");
> while ((req = blk_peek_request(q)) != NULL)
> scsi_kill_request(req, q);
> return;
Can this message appear during LUN scanning and hence confuse users ?
Also, patch 3308511 is already present in several stable trees so
shouldn't a patch like the above CC stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx too ?
Bart.
--
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
