On 12/07/12 16:10, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 12/06/2012 04:55 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
Currently __scsi_remove_device() skips devices that are visible and
offline. Make sure that these devices get removed by changing their
device state into SDEV_DEL at the start of __scsi_remove_device().
Also, avoid that __scsi_remove_device() gets called a second time
for devices that are in state SDEV_CANCEL when scsi_forget_host()
is invoked.

Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanass...@acm.org>
Cc: James Bottomley <jbottom...@parallels.com>
Cc: Mike Christie <micha...@cs.wisc.edu>
Cc: Hannes Reinecke <h...@suse.de>
Cc: Tejun Heo <t...@kernel.org>
---
  drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c  |    2 +-
  drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c |    4 ++--
  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
index 3e58b22..0612fba 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
@@ -1889,7 +1889,7 @@ void scsi_forget_host(struct Scsi_Host *shost)
   restart:
      spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags);
      list_for_each_entry(sdev, &shost->__devices, siblings) {
-        if (sdev->sdev_state == SDEV_DEL)
+        if (scsi_device_being_removed(sdev))
              continue;
          spin_unlock_irqrestore(shost->host_lock, flags);
          __scsi_remove_device(sdev);
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
index 2ff7ba5..4348f12 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
@@ -959,8 +959,8 @@ void __scsi_remove_device(struct scsi_device *sdev)
      unsigned long flags;

      if (sdev->is_visible) {
-        if (scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_CANCEL) != 0)
-            return;
+        WARN_ON_ONCE(scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_CANCEL) != 0 &&
+                 scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_DEL) != 0);

          bsg_unregister_queue(sdev->request_queue);
          device_unregister(&sdev->sdev_dev);

Hmm. Then we would be getting a warning if the device is already in
SDEV_DEL, wouldn't we?
And what about offlined devices?
We should be safe to remove them, or?

Hello Hannes,

The intent of this patch is that __scsi_remove_device() gets invoked exactly once per device. This function shouldn't be invoked for devices already in state SDEV_DEL.

Offlined devices will be transitioned directly from one of the two offline states into state SDEV_DEL.

The above patch fixes a nasty crash by avoiding that a second __scsi_remove_device() call queues I/O (sd_shutdown()) after scsi_remove_host() has already finished.

Bart.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to