From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Sebastian Herbszt <herbszt@gmx.de>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Separate target visibility from reaped state information
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:03:29 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1453251809.2320.56.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <yq1oachqehs.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
On Tue, 2016-01-19 at 19:30 -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> > > > > > "Bart" == Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
> > > > > > writes:
>
> Bart> Instead of representing the states "visible in sysfs" and "has
> Bart> been removed from the target list" by a single state variable,
> use
> Bart> two variables to represent this information.
>
> James: Are you happy with the latest iteration of this? Should I
> queue
> it?
Well, I'm OK with the patch: it's a simple transformation of the
enumerated state to a two bit state. What I can't see is how it fixes
any soft lockup.
The only change from the current workflow is that the DEL transition
(now the reaped flag) is done before the spin lock is dropped which
would fix a tiny window for two threads both trying to remove the same
target, but there's nothing that could possibly fix an iterative soft
lockup caused by restarting the loop, which is what the changelog says.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-20 1:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-08 16:51 [PATCH] Separate target visibility from reaped state information Bart Van Assche
2016-01-18 8:55 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-01-20 0:30 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-01-20 1:03 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2016-01-31 17:54 ` Sebastian Herbszt
2016-02-02 1:11 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-02-02 9:03 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-02-03 17:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-02-03 17:54 ` James Bottomley
2016-02-03 21:37 ` *** GMX Spamverdacht *** " Sebastian Herbszt
2016-02-07 22:48 ` Sebastian Herbszt
2016-02-02 3:43 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-02-02 11:46 ` James Bottomley
2016-02-02 18:29 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-02-03 0:43 ` James Bottomley
2016-02-03 1:17 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-02-03 2:01 ` James Bottomley
2016-02-03 22:38 ` Sebastian Herbszt
2016-02-03 22:55 ` James Bottomley
2016-02-03 23:28 ` Sebastian Herbszt
2016-02-07 22:56 ` Sebastian Herbszt
2016-02-10 14:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-02-10 15:34 ` James Bottomley
2016-02-10 16:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1453251809.2320.56.camel@HansenPartnership.com \
--to=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=herbszt@gmx.de \
--cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.