On Tue, 2018-05-15 at 09:00 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_target.c b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_target.c
> index 025dc2d3f3de..cdf671c2af61 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_target.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_target.c
> @@ -3719,7 +3719,8 @@ void qlt_free_cmd(struct qla_tgt_cmd *cmd)
> return;
> }
> cmd->jiffies_at_free = get_jiffies_64();
> - percpu_ida_free(&sess->se_sess->sess_tag_pool, cmd->se_cmd.map_tag);
> + sbitmap_queue_clear(&sess->se_sess->sess_tag_pool, cmd->se_cmd.map_tag,
> + cmd->se_cmd.map_cpu);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(qlt_free_cmd);
Please introduce functions in the target core for allocating and freeing a tag
instead of spreading the knowledge of how to allocate and free tags over all
target drivers.
> +int iscsit_wait_for_tag(struct se_session *se_sess, int state, int *cpup)
> +{
> + int tag = -1;
> + DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
> + struct sbq_wait_state *ws;
> +
> + if (state == TASK_RUNNING)
> + return tag;
> +
> + ws = &se_sess->sess_tag_pool.ws[0];
> + for (;;) {
> + prepare_to_wait_exclusive(&ws->wait, &wait, state);
> + if (signal_pending_state(state, current))
> + break;
This looks weird to me. Shouldn't target code ignore signals instead of causing
tag allocation to fail if a signal is received?
> + schedule();
> + tag = sbitmap_queue_get(&se_sess->sess_tag_pool, cpup);
> + }
> +
> + finish_wait(&ws->wait, &wait);
> + return tag;
> +}
Thanks,
Bart.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
