[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: ufs: Put SCSI host after remove it
On 2019-12-16 10:39, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 2019-12-15 17:34, wrote:
>> This is applied to 5.5/scsi-queue. The two changes I patsed from you
>> are
>> not merged yet, I am still doing code review to them, so there is no
>> blk_cleanup_queue() calls in my code base. I am just saying you may
>> move
>> your blk_cleanup_queue() calls below cancel_work_sync(&hba->eh_work)
>> if
>> my change applies. How do you think?
>> scsi_host_put() was there before but explicitly removed by
>> afa3dfd42d205b106787476647735aa1de1a5d02. I agree with you, without
>> this
>> change, there is memory leak.
> Hi Can,
> Since your patch restores a call that was removed earlier, please
> consider adding a Fixes: tag to your patch.
> Please also have a look at
> As one can see my patches that introduce blk_cleanup_queue() and
> blk_mq_free_tag_set() calls have already been queued on Martin's
> 5.6/scsi-queue branch.
> Bart.

Hi Bart,

Sure, I will add the Fixes tag and rebase my changes. How about the
part of this change? Does it look good to you?

Sorry I was not aware of that your changes have been applied to
I am still trying to get it tested on my setups...
Anyways, aside of hba->cmd_queue, tearing down hba->tmf_queue before
scsi_remove_host() may be problem too. Requests can still be
sent before and during scsi_remove_host(). If a request timed out,
task abort will be invoked to abort the request, during which
hba->tmf_queue is expected to be present. Please correct me if I am


Can Guo.

 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-16 04:13    [W:0.121 / U:0.216 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site