On Tue, 2017-02-07 at 19:11 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > Can you elaborate a bit on how exactly you've been testing these changes > for the first order (handle ABORT_TASKs and LUN_RESET with outstanding > backend I/O) and second order (handle session shutdown while order one > is active) issues mentioned earlier..? Previous tests were run against a fileio backend. That's probably why my tests passed despite the circular wait in the TMF code (that has already been solved BTW). Anyway, the tests I run to verify the TMF code are: 1. The libiscsi unit tests. 2. Running fio with a high queue depth and data verification enabled in one shell and the following code in a second shell: while true; do sg_reset -d /dev/sd...; sleep .1; echo -n .; done > Once the test is completed, perform an explicit fabric logout and target > shutdown. This is to ensure there are no reference leaks, kernel hung > tasks in un-interruptible sleep, or other memory leaks that have been > introduced by the series. I run all my tests against a kernel with kmemleak enabled. That's a very effective way for detecting memory leaks. Bart.-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe target-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
