lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/8] scsi: libsas: always unregister the old device if going to discover new
From
Date


On 2018/5/31 23:09, John Garry wrote:
> On 29/05/2018 03:23, Jason Yan wrote:
>> If we went into sas_rediscover_dev() the attached_sas_addr was already
>> insured not to be zero. So it's unnecessary to check if the
>> attached_sas_addr is zero.
>>
>> And although if the sas address is not changed, we always have to
>> unregister the old device when we are going to register a new one. We
>> cannot just leave the device there and bring up the new.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Yan <yanaijie@huawei.com>
>> CC: chenxiang <chenxiang66@hisilicon.com>
>> CC: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
>> CC: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
>> CC: Ewan Milne <emilne@redhat.com>
>> CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>> CC: Tomas Henzl <thenzl@redhat.com>
>> CC: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
>> CC: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c | 13 +++++--------
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> index 8b7114348def..629c580d906b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> @@ -2054,14 +2054,11 @@ static int sas_rediscover_dev(struct
>> domain_device *dev, int phy_id, bool last)
>> return res;
>> }
>>
>> - /* delete the old link */
>> - if (SAS_ADDR(phy->attached_sas_addr) &&
>> - SAS_ADDR(sas_addr) != SAS_ADDR(phy->attached_sas_addr)) {
>> - SAS_DPRINTK("ex %016llx phy 0x%x replace %016llx\n",
>> - SAS_ADDR(dev->sas_addr), phy_id,
>> - SAS_ADDR(phy->attached_sas_addr));
>> - sas_unregister_devs_sas_addr(dev, phy_id, last);
>> - }
>
> The preceeding checks in code check for no device/comm fail or SATA
> flutter.
>
> If we're rediscovering the device and the SAS address has not changed,
> then why previously still try to discover a new device? I'm guessing
> sas_discover_new() had no affect in this case, since maybe since the PHY
> was already discovered.

When we went here, means it is not flutter, something must change,
either the device type or the phy address. Then we call
sas_discover_new(). And sas_discover_new() sure *have* effect in this
case. Please check sas_discover_new() carefully.

But that would not make sense since you say "we
> are going to register a new one". Or, if we are always going to register
> a new one, how did we ensure we always unregistered the old device
> previously (when SAS address did not change)?
>

If SAS address did not change, the device type must changed, otherwise
it will be a "flutter" and won't get here. So if the device type
changed, do we have a reason to keep the device? I don't think so.

>> + /* we always have to delete the old device when we went here */
>> + SAS_DPRINTK("ex %016llx phy 0x%x replace %016llx\n",
>> + SAS_ADDR(dev->sas_addr), phy_id,
>> + SAS_ADDR(phy->attached_sas_addr));
>> + sas_unregister_devs_sas_addr(dev, phy_id, last);
>>
>> return sas_discover_new(dev, phy_id);
>> }
>>
>
>
>
> .
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-01 02:28    [W:0.031 / U:8.136 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site