linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	wangyijing <wangyijing@huawei.com>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	John Garry <john.garry2@mail.dcu.ie>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linuxarm@huawei.com>, <lindar_liu@usish.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Jinpu Wang <jinpu.wang@profitbricks.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] scsi: libsas: fix WARN on device removal
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 16:56:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <96fb83c2-ef02-181c-b27d-bb4c3dbc8194@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4jtK4A0mKnBxuurncy8YSLPBC6_nEcanzF3v38TJya8mw@mail.gmail.com>

On 21/11/2016 17:13, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:16 AM, John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote:
>>>>>> @Maintainers, would you be willing to accept this patch as an interim
>>>>>> fix
>>>>>> for the dastardly WARN while we try to fix the flutter issue?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To me this adds a bug to quiet a benign, albeit noisy, warning.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is the bug which is being added?
>>>
>>>
>>> The bug where we queue a port teardown, but see a port formation event
>>> in the meantime.
>>
>>
>> As I understand, this vulnerability already exists:
>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=143801026028006&w=2
>>
>> I actually don't understand how libsas dealt with flutter (which I take to
>> mean a burst of up and down events) before these changes, as it can only
>> queue simultaneously one up and one down event per port. So, if we get a
>> flutter, then the events are lost and we get indeterminate state.
>>
>
> The events are not lost.

In sas_queue_event(), if there is a particular event pending for a 
port/PHY, we cannot queue further same event types for that port/PHY. I 
think my colleagues found issue where we try to enqueue multiple 
complementary events.

> The new problem this patch introduces is
> delaying sas port deletion where it was previously immediate.  So now
> we can get into a situation where the port has gone down and can start
> processing a port up event before the previous deletion work has run.
>
>>>
>>>> And it's a very noisy warning, as in 6K lines on the console when an
>>>> expander is unplugged.
>>>
>>>
>>> Does something like this modulate the failure?
>
> I'm curious if we simply need to fix the double deletion of the
> sas_port bsg queue, could you try the changes below?
>

No, I just tested it on a root port and we get the same WARN.

>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c
>>> b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c            index
>>> 60b651bfaa01..11401e5c88ba 100644
>>>                  --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c
>>> @@ -262,9 +262,10 @@ static void sas_bsg_remove(struct Scsi_Host
>>> *shost, struct sas_rphy *rphy
>>>  {
>>>         struct request_queue *q;
>>>
>>> -       if (rphy)
>>> +       if (rphy) {
>>>                 q = rphy->q;
>>> -       else
>>> +               rphy->q = NULL;
>>> +       } else
>>>                 q = to_sas_host_attrs(shost)->q;
>>>
>>>         if (!q)
>>>
>>> .
>>>
>>
>>
>
> .
>

  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-22 16:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-03 14:58 [RFC PATCH] scsi: libsas: fix WARN on device removal John Garry
2016-11-09 12:28 ` John Garry
2016-11-09 17:36   ` John Garry
2016-11-09 19:09     ` Dan Williams
2016-11-09 20:35       ` Dan Williams
2016-11-10 11:53         ` John Garry
2016-11-11  8:12           ` wangyijing
2016-11-11  8:23             ` John Garry
2016-11-11  8:49               ` wangyijing
2016-11-17 15:23                 ` John Garry
2016-11-18  1:51                   ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-11-18  1:53                   ` Dan Williams
2016-11-18  9:00                     ` John Garry
2016-11-18 19:08                       ` Dan Williams
2016-11-21 15:16                         ` John Garry
2016-11-21 17:13                           ` Dan Williams
2016-11-22 16:56                             ` John Garry [this message]
2016-11-23  1:07                               ` wangyijing

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=96fb83c2-ef02-181c-b27d-bb4c3dbc8194@huawei.com \
    --to=john.garry@huawei.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=jinpu.wang@profitbricks.com \
    --cc=john.garry2@mail.dcu.ie \
    --cc=lindar_liu@usish.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=wangyijing@huawei.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).