Hi, James, Ewan,
On 2016/12/8 10:33, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-12-08 at 10:28 +0800, Wei Fang wrote:
>> Hi, James, Ewan,
>>
>> On 2016/12/8 7:43, James Bottomley wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2016-12-07 at 15:30 -0500, Ewan D. Milne wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2016-12-07 at 12:09 -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
>>>>> Hm, it looks like the state set in scsi_sysfs_add_sdev() is
>>>>> bogus.
>>>>> We expect the state to have been properly set before that (in
>>>>> scsi_add_lun), so can we not simply remove it?
>>>>>
>>>>> James
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was considering that, but...
>>>>
>>>> enum scsi_device_state {
>>>> SDEV_CREATED = 1, /* device created but not added
>>>> to
>>>> sysfs
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * Only internal commands allowed
>>>> (for inq) */
>>>>
>>>> So it seems the intent was for the state to not change until
>>>> then.
>>>
>>> I think this is historical. There was a change somewhere that
>>> moved
>>> the sysfs state handling out of the sdev stat to is_visible, so the
>>> sdev state no-longer reflects it.
>>>
>>>> The call to set the SDEV_RUNNING state earlier in scsi_add_lun()
>>>> was added with:
>>>>
>>>> commit 6f4267e3bd1211b3d09130e626b0b3d885077610
>>>> Author: James Bottomley <james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com>
>>>> Date: Fri Aug 22 16:53:31 2008 -0500
>>>>
>>>> [SCSI] Update the SCSI state model to allow blocking in the
>>>> created state
>>>>
>>>> Which allows the device to go into ->BLOCK (which is needed,
>>>> since it
>>>> actually happens).
>>>>
>>>> Should we remove the call from scsi_sysfs_add_sdev() and change
>>>> the
>>>> comment in scsi_device.h to reflect the intent?
>>
>> This sounds reasonable.
>>
>>> Assuming someone with the problem actually tests it, yes.
>>
>> This problem can be stably reproduced on Zengxi Chen's machine, who
>> reported the bug. We can test it on this machine.
>>
>> The patch is as below, just for sure:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
>> index 0734927..82dfe07 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
>> @@ -1204,10 +1204,6 @@ int scsi_sysfs_add_sdev(struct scsi_device
>> *sdev)
>> struct request_queue *rq = sdev->request_queue;
>> struct scsi_target *starget = sdev->sdev_target;
>>
>> - error = scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_RUNNING);
>> - if (error)
>> - return error;
>> -
I looked through those code and found that if we fix this bug
by removing setting the state in scsi_sysfs_add_sdev(), it
can't be fixed completely:
scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_RUNNING) in scsi_add_lun() and
scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_CREATED_BLOCK) in scsi_internal_device_block()
can be called simultaneously. Because there is no synchronization
between scsi_device_set_state(), those calls may both return
success, and the state may be SDEV_RUNNING after that, and the
device queue is stopped.
Thanks,
Wei
> That's it, although not the second hunk: CREATED still means device not
> added to sysfs. It's just that RUNNING now doesn't mean it is.
>
> James
>
>
>
> .
>
--
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
