lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] libsas: flush pending destruct work in sas_unregister_domain_devices()
From
Date
On 28/11/2017 17:04, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 3:18 AM, John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote:
>> On 28/11/2017 08:20, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 04:24:45PM -0800, Cong Wang wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We saw dozens of the following kernel waring:
>>>>
>>>> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 705 at fs/sysfs/group.c:224
>>>> sysfs_remove_group+0x54/0x88()
>>>> sysfs group ffffffff81ab7670 not found for kobject '6:0:3:0'
>>>> Modules linked in: cpufreq_ondemand x86_pkg_temp_thermal coretemp
>>>> kvm_intel kvm microcode raid0 iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support sb_edac edac_core
>>>> lpc_ich mfd_core ioatdma i2c_i801 shpchp wmi hed acpi_cpufreq lp parport
>>>> tcp_diag inet_diag ipmi_si ipmi_devintf ipmi_msghandler sch_fq_codel igb ptp
>>>> pps_core i2c_algo_bit i2c_core crc32c_intel isci libsas scsi_transport_sas
>>>> dca ipv6
>>>> CPU: 0 PID: 705 Comm: kworker/u240:0 Not tainted 4.1.35.el7.x86_64 #1
>>>
>>>
>>> This should by now be fixed with commit fbce4d97fd43 ("scsi: fixup kernel
>>> warning during rmmod()" which went into v4.14-rc6.
>>>
>>
>> Is that the same issue? I think Cong Wang is just trying to deal with the
>> longstanding libsas hotplug WARN.
>
> Right, we saw it on both 4.1 and 3.14, clearly an old bug.
>
>
>>
>> We at Huawei are still working to fix it. Our patchset is under internal
>> test at the moment.
>>
>> As for this patch:
>>> drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_discover.c | 7 ++++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_discover.c
>>> b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_discover.c
>>> index 60de66252fa2..27c11fc7aa2b 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_discover.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_discover.c
>>> @@ -388,6 +388,11 @@ void sas_unregister_dev(struct asd_sas_port *port,
>>> struct domain_device *dev)
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static void sas_flush_work(struct asd_sas_port *port)
>>> +{
>>> + scsi_flush_work(port->ha->core.shost);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> void sas_unregister_domain_devices(struct asd_sas_port *port, int gone)
>>> {
>>> struct domain_device *dev, *n;
>>> @@ -401,8 +406,8 @@ void sas_unregister_domain_devices(struct asd_sas_port
>>> *port, int gone)
>>> list_for_each_entry_safe(dev, n, &port->disco_list, disco_list_node)
>>> sas_unregister_dev(port, dev);
>>>
>>> + sas_flush_work(port);
>>
>> How can this work as sas_unregister_domain_devices() may be called from the
>> same workqueue which you're trying to flush?
>

Sorry for slow reply, just remembered this now.

>
> I don't understand, the only caller of sas_unregister_domain_devices()
> is sas_deform_port().
>

And sas_deform_port() may be called from another worker on the same
queue, right? As in sas_phye_loss_of_signal()->sas_deform_port()

As I see today, this is the problem callchain:
sas_deform_port()
sas_unregister_domain_devices()
sas_unregister_dev()
sas_discover_event(DISCE_DESTRUCT)

The device destruct takes place in a separate worker from which
sas_deform_port() is called, but the same queue. So we have this queued
destruct happen after the port is fully deformed -> hence the WARN.

I guess you only tested your patch on disks attached through an expander.

Thanks,
John








> .
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-07 14:38    [W:0.119 / U:3.764 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site