From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752705AbbJBNQ3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Oct 2015 09:16:29 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:59549 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750730AbbJBNQ2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Oct 2015 09:16:28 -0400 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 06:16:17 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Johannes Thumshirn Cc: Christoph Hellwig , James Bottomley , Hannes Reinecke , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] SCSI: Fix hard lockup in scsi_remove_target() Message-ID: <20151002131617.GA13860@infradead.org> References: <1443774062-15638-1-git-send-email-jthumshirn@suse.de> <20151002124903.GA11987@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 03:09:33PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > Having the list_move() outside of the host_lock was purely by > accident. Interestingly the stressing didn't mind it. But yes you're > right, __scsi_remove_target() should be made host_lock() save for being > called under the host_lock. > > Regarding the list move, does it look OK for you (i.e. do we still need > it after reworking __scsi_remove_target())? IMHO yes, but I only have > half a year of experience in this area). Hi Johannes, your general approach looks fine, we just need to fix up the locking as far as I can tell.