On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 2:57 AM, Joe Eykholt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 10/22/10 8:21 AM, Hillf Danton wrote: >> There seems no cleanup left when FC_EX_CLOSED encountered, which may >> be from fc_exch_reset(). > > Are you sure? It seems that the RRQ exchange has a hold on another > exchange, the one that's the subject of the RRQ. That exchange
In case of fc_exch_pool_reset(), each exch on ex_list is delivered to fc_exch_reset(), so "another" and "that" exch are treated in same way. After cleanup, then the resp handler, if attached, is issued with FC_EX_CLOSED, so no more work left for the resp handler. If still needed, overwork occurs before calling resp handler. > still needs to be released. I could be wrong, it's been a while. > >> Signed-off-by: Hillf Danton <[email protected]> >> --- >> >> --- a/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c 2010-09-13 07:07:38.000000000 +0800 >> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c 2010-10-22 23:17:50.000000000 +0800 >> @@ -1827,7 +1827,9 @@ static void fc_exch_rrq_resp(struct fc_s >> if (IS_ERR(fp)) { >> int err = PTR_ERR(fp); >> >> - if (err == -FC_EX_CLOSED || err == -FC_EX_TIMEOUT) >> + if (err == -FC_EX_CLOSED) >> + return; >> + if (err == -FC_EX_TIMEOUT) >> goto cleanup; >> FC_EXCH_DBG(aborted_ep, "Cannot process RRQ, " >> "frame error %d\n", err); >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
