On 04/06/2012 12:14 PM, Tomas Henzl wrote:
> On 04/06/2012 11:39 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 04/05/12 13:58, Tomas Henzl wrote:
>>
>>> When the async scan is protected this way a further protection via ref. count is no more needed
>>> so remove it
>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
>>> index 29c4c04..be9e6fe 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
>>> @@ -1743,10 +1743,9 @@ static struct async_scan_data *scsi_prep_async_scan(struct Scsi_Host *shost)
>>>
>>> data = kmalloc(sizeof(*data), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> if (!data)
>>> - goto err;
>>> - data->shost = scsi_host_get(shost);
>>> - if (!data->shost)
>>> - goto err;
>>> + return NULL;
>>> +
>>> + data->shost = shost;
>>> init_completion(&data->prev_finished);
>>>
>>> mutex_lock(&shost->scan_mutex);
>> Maybe it's better to leave the scsi_host_get() / scsi_host_put() pair in
>> scsi_prep_async_scan() and scsi_finish_async_scan(). Let's have a look
>> at the following code in scsi_finish_async_scan():
>>
>> spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags);
>> shost->async_scan = 0;
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(shost->host_lock, flags);
>>
>> If the context that is waiting for shost->async_scan wouldn't lock
>> shost->host_lock after having observed that shost->async_scan became
>> zero then shost->host_lock could already have been freed before
>> scsi_finish_async_scan() has unlocked that spin lock. Personally I
>> prefer to avoid having such subtle dependencies between the async
>> scanning code and the context waiting for it to finish.
Actually that would be worse than to depend on the shost->host_lock
while (shost->async_scan)
msleep(10);
spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags); /* hi this spinlock is needed for async scan test above */
We can add this comment ^ ,or add locking to the while loop.
Otherwise we will have this in scsi_finish_async_scan
+ spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags);
+ shost->async_scan = 0;
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(shost->host_lock, flags);
scsi_host_put(shost);
...}
This means that after scsi_remove_host is left and the driver rmmoded we call
scsi_host_put which in the end calls scsi_host_dev_release and this function tries to use
the now invalid host_template functions again.
> It's also my preference It's not built in for purpose, I only haven't
> noticed it :)
> Thanks for the advice.
>
> Tomas
>
>
>> 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
--
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
