Am Dienstag, den 14.01.2020, 03:28 +0000 schrieb EJ Hsu:
> Oliver Neukum wrote:
>
> > Am Sonntag, den 12.01.2020, 19:30 -0800 schrieb EJ Hsu:
> >
> > Isn't that the bug? A command to a detached device should fail.
> > Could you please elaborate? This issue would not be limited to uas.
> >
>
> In the case I mentioned, the hub thread of external hub running
> uas_probe() will get stuck waiting for the completion of scsi scan.
>
> The scsi scan will try to probe a single LUN using a SCSI INQUIRY.
> If the external hub has been unplugged before LUN probe, the device
> state of uas device will be set to USB_STATE_NOTATTACHED by the
> root hub thread. So, all the following calls to usb_submit_urb() in
> uas driver will return -NODEV, and accordingly uas_queuecommand_lck()
> will return SCSI_MLQUEUE_DEVICE_BUSY to scsi_request_fn().
And that looks like the root cause. The queue isn't busy.
It is dead.
> scsi_request_fn() then puts this scsi command back into request queue.
> Because this scsi device is just created and during LUN probe process,
> this scsi command is the only one in the request queue. So, it will be picked
> up soon and dispatched to uas driver again. This cycle will continue until
> uas_disconnect() is called and its "resetting" flag is set. However, the
> hub thread of external hub still got stuck waiting for the completion of
> this scsi command, and may not be able to run uas_disconnect().
> A deadlock happened.
I see. But we are working around insufficient error reporting in the
SCSI midlayer.
> > > +static void uas_scan_work(struct work_struct *work) {
> > > + struct uas_dev_info *devinfo =
> > > + container_of(work, struct uas_dev_info, scan_work);
> > > + struct Scsi_Host *shost = usb_get_intfdata(devinfo->intf);
> > > +
> > > + dev_dbg(&devinfo->intf->dev, "starting scan\n");
> > > + scsi_scan_host(shost);
> > > + dev_dbg(&devinfo->intf->dev, "scan complete\n");
> > > +
> > > + usb_autopm_put_interface(devinfo->intf);
> >
> > scsi_scan_host() does runtime PM on the SCSI level. There is no need for us to
> > duplicate that.
> >
>
> In my opinion, if scsi_scan_host() will be run asynchronously, this interface
> needs to be guarded against runtime PM between uas_probe() & uas_scan_work().
Yes it does. But it has a child, the SCSI host, which has an elevated
count. It is already guarded.
Regards
Oliver
