[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7002ce0c5c84409cae6910675f7fe4c0@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2020 13:07:39 +0800
From: Can Guo <cang@...eaurora.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>,
Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
jejb@...ux.ibm.com, beanhuo@...ron.com, asutoshd@...eaurora.org,
matthias.bgg@...il.com, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kuohong.wang@...iatek.com, peter.wang@...iatek.com,
chun-hung.wu@...iatek.com, andy.teng@...iatek.com,
chaotian.jing@...iatek.com, cc.chou@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] scsi: ufs: Cleanup completed request without interrupt
notification
Hi Bart,
On 2020-08-03 11:12, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 2020-07-31 16:17, Can Guo wrote:
>> For scsi_dma_unmap() part, that is true - we should make it serialized
>> with
>> any other completion paths. I've found it during my fault injection
>> test, so
>> I've made a patch to fix it, but it only comes in my next error
>> recovery
>> enhancement patch series. Please check the attachment.
>
> Hi Can,
>
> It is not clear to me how that patch serializes scsi_dma_unmap()
> against
> other completion paths? Doesn't the regular completion path call
> __ufshcd_transfer_req_compl() without holding the host lock?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
FYI, ufshcd_intr() holds the host spin lock the whole time. So, to your
question, the regular completion path from IRQ handler has the host lock
held.
Thanks,
Can Guo.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists