[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160330234456.00004733@localhost>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 23:44:56 +0200
From: Sebastian Herbszt <herbszt@....de>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Ewan D. Milne" <emilne@...hat.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>,
Sebastian Herbszt <herbszt@....de>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 2/2] scsi: Add intermediate STARGET_REMOVE
state to scsi_target_state
Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> Add intermediate STARGET_REMOVE state to scsi_target_state to avoid running
> into the BUG_ON() in scsi_target_reap().
>
> This intermediate state is only valid in the path from scsi_remove_target() to
> scsi_target_destroy() indicating this target is going to be removed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>
> Fixes: 40998193560dab6c3ce8d25f4fa58a23e252ef38
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>
> Reviewed-by: Ewan D. Milne <emilne@...hat.com>
> ---
>
> Changes from v1:
> * The state transition from STARGET_CREATED to STARGET_DEL is legitimate,
> so don't BUG() on it. Found by the 0-Day Bot.
This is yet another attempt to fix 40998193560d. Can you please explain how
it is "superior" to the one proposed by Bart before [1] ?
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=145227191917602&w=2
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists