James Stevenson wrote:
> [LARGE SNIP]
>
>
>>Would you agree to test the patch (possibly next week).
>
>
> yeah sure.
>
I would be happy to test it as well.
-Brian
>
>
>>cheers
>>
>>-andrey
>>
>>
>>>>If you can reliably reproduce the problem you could give it a try.
>>>>
>>>>Anybody sees yet another race condition here? :))
>>>>
>>>>-andrey
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>While burning a CD tonight I ended up taking an oops on my system. I
>
> had
>
>>>>>the lkcd patch applied to my 2.4.19 kernel, so I was able to look at
>
> the
>
>>>>> oops after my system rebooted. After digging into it a little and
>>>>>looking at the ide-scsi code I think I found the problem but am not
>>>>>sure. How can idescsi_reset simply return SCSI_RESET_SUCCESS to the
>
> scsi
>
>>>>>mid layer? I think what is happening is that a command times out,
>>>>>idescsi_abort is called, which returns SCSI_ABORT_SNOOZE. Later on
>>>>>idescsi_reset gets called, which returns SCSI_RESET_SUCCESS. At this
>>>>>point the scsi mid-layer owns the scsi_cmnd and returns the failure
>
> back
>
>>>>>up the chain. Later on, the command gets run through
>>>>>idescsi_end_request, which then tries to access the scsi_cmnd
>
> structure
>
>>>>>which is it no longer owns.
>>>>>
>>>>>Any help is appreciated. I have a complete lkcd dump of the failure if
>>>>>anyone would like more information...
>>>>>
>
>
>
>
-- Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints...- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 31 2003 - 22:00:12 EST