From: Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
Stanley Jhu <stanleyjhu@google.com>
Cc: "Martin K . Petersen" <mkp@kernel.org>,
<linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"James E . J . Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
"Alim Akhtar" <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>, Can Guo <can.guo@oss.qualcomm.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] scsi: ufs: core: Fix double release in ufshcd_abort()
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2026 17:09:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ef0c66c3704f3426e5fb0d26e61adfefd35eb9fb.camel@mediatek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fdb5c391-01ef-4a23-94c2-4f3853909348@acm.org>
On Wed, 2026-10-21 at 09:37 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 10/21/26 6:28 AM, Stanley Jhu wrote:
> > A return value of 0 here means the completion path, rather than
> > this abort path, has claimed the tag and may still be running
> > ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd() after it dropped outstanding_lock.
> Do we really need the code that checks that a command has completed
> without notification interrupt? I have never encountered any logs on
> any test setup that indicates that this happened.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
I remember that when the SSU timeout was only 1 sec, we'd pretty
easily hit the concurrent execution case between the timeout and
the complete path. But after change it to 10 sec along with patch
9a5f6c09d0fa (scsi: ufs: core: Simplify ufshcd_try_to_abort_task()),
it shouldn't happen anymore.
Thanks
Peter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-22 9:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-21 3:54 [PATCH v4 0/6] scsi: ufs: core: Factor hba->outstanding_reqs helper and fix double completions Stanley Jhu
2026-10-21 3:54 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] scsi: ufs: core: Remove an always-false WARN_ONCE() Stanley Jhu
2026-10-21 3:54 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] scsi: ufs: core: Add a helper for clearing hba->outstanding_reqs Stanley Jhu
2026-10-21 4:06 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] scsi: ufs: core: Fix double completion in ufshcd_clear_lu_cmds() Stanley Jhu
2026-10-21 4:06 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] scsi: ufs: core: Fix double release in ufshcd_eh_timed_out() Stanley Jhu
2026-10-21 13:09 ` Peter Wang
2026-10-21 4:06 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] scsi: ufs: core: Fix double release in ufshcd_abort() Stanley Jhu
2026-10-21 13:12 ` Peter Wang
2026-10-21 13:28 ` Stanley Jhu
2026-10-21 16:37 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-10-22 3:44 ` Stanley Jhu
2026-10-22 9:09 ` Peter Wang [this message]
2026-10-22 9:07 ` Peter Wang
2026-10-21 4:06 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] scsi: ufs: core: Do not release a reserved request " Stanley Jhu
2026-10-21 13:10 ` Peter Wang
2026-10-22 9:07 [PATCH v4 5/6] scsi: ufs: core: Fix double release " Peter Wang (王信友)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ef0c66c3704f3426e5fb0d26e61adfefd35eb9fb.camel@mediatek.com \
--to=peter.wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
--cc=beanhuo@micron.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=can.guo@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkp@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stanleyjhu@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®