On 07/01/13 10:27, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 06/27/2013 04:57 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
>> index dfbaa34..666b741 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
>> @@ -959,14 +959,16 @@ void __scsi_remove_device(struct scsi_device *sdev)
>> {
>> struct Scsi_Host *shost = sdev->host;
>> struct device *dev = &sdev->sdev_gendev;
>> + enum scsi_device_state sdev_state;
>> int res;
>>
>> if (sdev->is_visible) {
>> spin_lock_irq(shost->host_lock);
>> + sdev_state = sdev->sdev_state;
>> res = scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_CANCEL);
>> spin_unlock_irq(shost->host_lock);
>>
>> - if (res != 0)
>> + if (res != 0 && sdev_state != SDEV_TRANSPORT_OFFLINE)
>> return;
>>
>> bsg_unregister_queue(sdev->request_queue);
>>
> Hmm. This is really subtle. Do you mind adding inserting a comment
> here on why this is required?
How about inserting the following comment just above the last if-statement
in the code cited above ?
/*
* The transition from SDEV_TRANSPORT_OFFLINE into SDEV_CANCEL
* is not allowed since this transition would re-enable I/O. If
* the device state was already SDEV_TRANSPORT_OFFLINE,
* proceed with device removal.
*/
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
