On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 10:15 -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 07:32 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > Hm, I seem to have missed the part in this thread where someone said > > that it was valid to have a parent reference a child device. That's > > just wrong and needs to be fixed. Is that in the scsi layer somewhere? > > The block layer? It sure isn't in the driver core... > > This is the piece I'm still not clear on. It's something to do with the > gendisk. I'd have to look in block, but I believe the queue takes a ref > to the gendisk.
Yes, the queue is a child of the disk. > The scsi_device has a ref to the queue Yeah, while the queue is a grandchild of the scsi_device with the unified sysfs layout. > and the scsi_disk (in sd) has a > ref to both the scsi_device and the gendisk. That means, until sd is > unbound and the scsi_disk released, there's an implied unbreakable > reference chain. > > at least, I think that's what the problem is. Yes, sounds right. We need to break that deleted-but-wait-for-cleanup at least at one of the devices involved. Thanks, Kay - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
