> I'm afraid that without the second half of that patch the following race
> is still possible:
> - sdev reference count drops to zero while scsi_run_queue() is in
>   progress and while that sdev is on the starved_list of its SCSI host;
>   scsi_device_dev_release_usercontext() call is scheduled but not yet
>   executed.
> - scsi_run_queue() takes that sdev off the local starved_list.
> - scsi_run_queue() calls get_device() and that call fails since the
>   sdev reference count is zero.
> - scsi_device_dev_release_usercontext() gets scheduled and frees the
>   sdev.
> - scsi_run_queue() proceeds and calls __blk_run_queue() on a freed
>   queue, which is what we were trying to avoid.
Thank you for the explanation. It look correct. Let's check one more thing.
What If __scsi_remove_device doesn't release device? : reference count
is more than 2.
So We lost starved_list but device is exist. Is there any issue about this?

Chanho,
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to