Re: [PATCH v11 3/9] Avoid calling __scsi_remove_device() twice

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 10:37 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 06/24/13 19:38, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 14:52 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >> SCSI devices are added to the shost->__devices list from inside
> >> scsi_alloc_sdev(). If something goes wrong during LUN scanning,
> >> e.g. a transport layer failure occurs, then __scsi_remove_device()
> >> can get invoked by the LUN scanning code for a SCSI device in
> >> state SDEV_CREATED_BLOCK or SDEV_BLOCKED. If this happens then
> >> the SCSI device has not yet been added to sysfs (is_visible == 0).
> >> Make sure that if this happens these devices are transitioned
> >> into state SDEV_DEL. This avoids that __scsi_remove_device()
> >> gets invoked a second time by scsi_forget_host().
> > 
> > The current principle is that scsi_remove_device can fail, so the
> > condition you're avoiding is expected.  If you want to make it always
> > succeed, we have to worry about any device state racing with an
> > asynchronous remove, which looks like a whole nasty can of worms.
> > 
> > The change log makes it sound like what you actually want to enable is
> > the ability to remove devices which fail probing but which are in the
> > blocked state, so why not just respin with only that, which is just
> > adding the blocked states to the ->SDEV_DEL state transitions?
> 
> If what you had in mind is the patch below, I think we agree:
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> index e3d6276..eaea242 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> @@ -2185,6 +2185,8 @@ scsi_device_set_state(struct scsi_device *sdev, enum scsi_device_state state)
>  		case SDEV_OFFLINE:
>  		case SDEV_TRANSPORT_OFFLINE:
>  		case SDEV_CANCEL:
> +		case SDEV_BLOCK:
> +		case SDEV_CREATED_BLOCK:

Something like this, yes.  For the probe lun case, we have to be in
CREATED, so any block action transitions only to CREATED_BLOCK.  The
BLOCK->DEL transition can only be a result of an async remove racing
with bringup, can't it?  Which is something I think we still want to
forbid.

James

--
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




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux