Hello James,
My understanding is that the scsi_device in SDEV_DEL state
is there in the scsi_host->devices/scsi_target->devices queue, just
because there is some outstanding command holding a reference to it.
It will need the device when it completes. Apart from this, for all practical purposes the scsi_device is gone from the system. It could
as well be removed from scsi_host->devices/scsi_target->devices lists
and be put in some other list, just to hold the scsi_device till
commands refering to it are completed.
The scanning code should not consider these devices to be present in the system. This is correctly handled today, as scsi_device_lookup/scsi_device_lookup_by_target return NULL if there
is an SDEV_DEL device in the list.
Since a scsi_device in SDEV_DEL state is "gone" from the system we should not hold any fresh references on to this device. The current
scsi_device_lookup/scsi_device_lookup_by_target implementation rightly
ensures that. And since all the sysfs linkages are also removed (in
__scsi_remove_device->device_del), user space can also not reference this device. All is good till now.
The problem happens when we try to add a new scsi_device with the same HBTL. Since we consider the device "gone" (as described above) we should
allow a new scsi_device with the same HBTL to be added (to the scsi_host->devices/scsi_target->devices list). This part is also correctly
implemented.
scsi_add_device->...->scsi_probe_and_add_lun->scsi_device_lookup_by_target
will _not_ return the device present in the SDEV_DEL state and hence the
scanning will go ahead and try to add a new scsi_device (this one in SDEV_RUNNING state) to the devices lists.
All is good even till now.
The PROBLEM is, now any scsi_device_lookup call trying to lookup this newly
added scsi_device, fails. This is because, scsi_device_lookup->__scsi_device_lookup
returns the first device that it finds in the list, which in this case
is the one in the SDEV_DEL state. Now the scsi_device_get call that scsi_device_lookup makes to get a reference on that device returns ENXIO
as the device is in SDEV_DEL state, resulting in scsi_device_lookup to return NULL.
What scsi_device_get does, is right, as we do not want to hold fresh references on scsi_devices in SDEV_DEL state. The problem is because
of this we fail to lookup the perfectly legitimate device (in SDEV_RUNNING
state) with the same HBTL sitting in the list.
One of the side effects of this is that the scsi_probe_and_add_lun()
goes ahead with the scanning and tries to add this existent device. This is the real problem.
My patch avoids this problem by not breaking from the __scsi_device_lookup
loop, if the device is in SDEV_DEL state. After all we should not consider
these devices to be part of the system. This will allow us to find the right scsi_device and this "trying to add an existent device"
problem will be avoided.
And also why should scsi_device_lookup and __scsi_device_lookup be different in behaviour. One returns devices in SDEV_DEL state, the other
doesn't. The comments suggest that they can be used interchangibly, but
for the locking and the extra reference that the scsi_device_lookup holds.
--
This is fixed as a side effect of the patch.
Comments welcome.
Thanx,
Tomar
--- James Smart <James.Smart@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This sounds like a return to the old behavior, where sdevs in SDEV_DEL
were ignored. However, it too had lots of bad effects. We'd have to go
back to the threads over the last 2 years that justified resurrecting
the sdev. Start looking at threads like :
http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=115555788730468&w=2
http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=116837744314913&w=2
http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=117139230702785&w=2
http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=117991046126294&w=2
Also, there's multiple parts to this - the sdev struct, and the sysfs objects
and thus namespace associated with the struct, etc.
So, in my mind, if this reverts to ignoring sdevs in SDEV_DEL, and creates
a duplicate sdev in SDEV_RUNNING, then it's the wrong patch. What should
be considered is where did the resurrection of the sdev go wrong. I
remember that Hannes did some updates
http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=118215727101887&w=2
but I don't believe these ever got merged upstream. Perhaps that's a good
place to start.
-- james s
Nagendra Tomar wrote:__scsi_device_lookup and __scsi_device_lookup_by_target do not check for the sdev_state and hence return scsi_devices with sdev_state set to SDEV_DEL also. It has the following side effects.http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/
We can have two scsi_devices with the same HBTL queued in the scsi_host->__devices/scsi_target->devices list, one
in the SDEV_DEL state and the other in, say SDEV_RUNNING state. If the one in the SDEV_DEL state is before the one in SDEV_RUNNING state, (which will almost always be the case) the scsi_device_lookup and scsi_device_lookup_by_target will never find the totally legitimate
scsi_device (the one in the SDEV_RUNNING state).
This is because __scsi_device_lookup/__scsi_device_lookup_by_target always returns the first one in the list (which in our case is the one with the SDEV_DEL state) and the scsi_device_get() which is called by scsi_device_lookup/scsi_device_lookup_by_target will return -ENXIO for this scsi_device, resulting in scsi_device_lookup and scsi_device_lookup_by_target to return NULL.
So we _cannot_ lookup a perfectly valid device present in the
list of scsi_devices.
The right thing to do is to not have __scsi_device_lookup
and __scsi_device_lookup_by_target match a device if the scsi_device
state is SDEV_DEL. This will also make these functions similar in behaviour to their scsi_device_lookup/scsi_device_lookup_by_target
counterparts, as the comments in the code suggest.
One way by which we can have two scsi_devices in the list is as follows. Suppose a scsi_device has some outstanding command(s) when scsi_remove_device is called for it. Due to the extra ref being held
by the command in flight, the __scsi_remove_device->put_device call will not actually free the scsi_device and it will remain in the scsi_device list albeit in the SDEV_DEL state. Now if we do a scsi_add_device for the same HBTL, a new device with the same HBTL
(this one in SDEV_RUNNING state) gets added to the scsi_device list. Infact if we call scsi_add_device one more time, it happily goes ahead and tries to add it once more, as scsi_probe_and_add_lun->scsi_device_lookup_by_target does not return
the already existing device. This will though result in the kobject EEXIST warning dump.
The patch below solves the problem described here by not
returning scsi_devices in SDEV_DEL state, thus allowing scsi_device
in SDEV_RUNNING state (if any) to be correctly returned, instead.
Thanx,
Tomar
Signed-off-by: Nagendra Singh Tomar <nagendra_tomar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
--- linux-2.6.23.14/drivers/scsi/scsi.c.orig 2008-01-23 18:06:02.000000000 +0530
+++ linux-2.6.23.14/drivers/scsi/scsi.c 2008-01-23 19:17:35.000000000 +0530
@@ -951,7 +951,7 @@ struct scsi_device *__scsi_device_lookup
struct scsi_device *sdev;
list_for_each_entry(sdev, &starget->devices, same_target_siblings) {
- if (sdev->lun ==lun)
+ if (sdev->lun == lun && sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_DEL)
return sdev;
}
@@ -1008,7 +1008,7 @@ struct scsi_device *__scsi_device_lookup
list_for_each_entry(sdev, &shost->__devices, siblings) {
if (sdev->channel == channel && sdev->id == id &&
- sdev->lun ==lun)
+ sdev->lun == lun && sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_DEL)
return sdev;
}
___________________________________________________________
Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! For Good
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
__________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com