* [PATCH 1/2] scsi: lpfc: spin_lock_irq() is not nestable
@ 2017-06-30 8:02 Dan Carpenter
2017-06-30 14:56 ` James Smart
2017-07-01 21:09 ` Martin K. Petersen
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2017-06-30 8:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: James Smart
Cc: Dick Kennedy, James E.J. Bottomley, Martin K. Petersen,
linux-scsi, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors
We're calling spin_lock_irq() multiple times, the problem is that on the
first spin_unlock_irq() then we will re-enable IRQs and we don't want
that.
Fixes: 966bb5b71196 ("scsi: lpfc: Break up IO ctx list into a separate get and put list")
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvmet.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvmet.c
index 7dc061a14f95..afc523209845 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvmet.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvmet.c
@@ -866,44 +866,44 @@ lpfc_nvmet_cleanup_io_context(struct lpfc_hba *phba)
unsigned long flags;
spin_lock_irqsave(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_get_lock, flags);
- spin_lock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_put_lock);
+ spin_lock(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_put_lock);
list_for_each_entry_safe(ctx_buf, next_ctx_buf,
&phba->sli4_hba.lpfc_nvmet_ctx_get_list, list) {
- spin_lock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
+ spin_lock(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
list_del_init(&ctx_buf->list);
- spin_unlock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
__lpfc_clear_active_sglq(phba,
ctx_buf->sglq->sli4_lxritag);
ctx_buf->sglq->state = SGL_FREED;
ctx_buf->sglq->ndlp = NULL;
- spin_lock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
+ spin_lock(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
list_add_tail(&ctx_buf->sglq->list,
&phba->sli4_hba.lpfc_nvmet_sgl_list);
- spin_unlock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
lpfc_sli_release_iocbq(phba, ctx_buf->iocbq);
kfree(ctx_buf->context);
}
list_for_each_entry_safe(ctx_buf, next_ctx_buf,
&phba->sli4_hba.lpfc_nvmet_ctx_put_list, list) {
- spin_lock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
+ spin_lock(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
list_del_init(&ctx_buf->list);
- spin_unlock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
__lpfc_clear_active_sglq(phba,
ctx_buf->sglq->sli4_lxritag);
ctx_buf->sglq->state = SGL_FREED;
ctx_buf->sglq->ndlp = NULL;
- spin_lock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
+ spin_lock(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
list_add_tail(&ctx_buf->sglq->list,
&phba->sli4_hba.lpfc_nvmet_sgl_list);
- spin_unlock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
lpfc_sli_release_iocbq(phba, ctx_buf->iocbq);
kfree(ctx_buf->context);
}
- spin_unlock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_put_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_put_lock);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_get_lock, flags);
}
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: lpfc: spin_lock_irq() is not nestable
2017-06-30 8:02 [PATCH 1/2] scsi: lpfc: spin_lock_irq() is not nestable Dan Carpenter
@ 2017-06-30 14:56 ` James Smart
2017-07-01 21:09 ` Martin K. Petersen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: James Smart @ 2017-06-30 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Carpenter
Cc: Dick Kennedy, James E.J. Bottomley, Martin K. Petersen,
linux-scsi, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors
On 6/30/2017 1:02 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> We're calling spin_lock_irq() multiple times, the problem is that on the
> first spin_unlock_irq() then we will re-enable IRQs and we don't want
> that.
>
> Fixes: 966bb5b71196 ("scsi: lpfc: Break up IO ctx list into a separate get and put list")
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>
looks good.
Signed-off-By: James Smart <james.smart@broadcom.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: lpfc: spin_lock_irq() is not nestable
2017-06-30 8:02 [PATCH 1/2] scsi: lpfc: spin_lock_irq() is not nestable Dan Carpenter
2017-06-30 14:56 ` James Smart
@ 2017-07-01 21:09 ` Martin K. Petersen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Martin K. Petersen @ 2017-07-01 21:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Carpenter
Cc: James Smart, Dick Kennedy, James E.J. Bottomley,
Martin K. Petersen, linux-scsi, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors
Dan,
> We're calling spin_lock_irq() multiple times, the problem is that on
> the first spin_unlock_irq() then we will re-enable IRQs and we don't
> want that.
Applied to 4.13/scsi-queue.
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-07-01 21:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-06-30 8:02 [PATCH 1/2] scsi: lpfc: spin_lock_irq() is not nestable Dan Carpenter
2017-06-30 14:56 ` James Smart
2017-07-01 21:09 ` Martin K. Petersen
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).