[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e4499a17-0278-5d16-f225-82217fb4f866@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2022 11:24:48 -0600
From: Mike Christie <michael.christie@...cle.com>
To: Wenchao Hao <haowenchao@...wei.com>, Lee Duncan <lduncan@...e.com>,
Chris Leech <cleech@...hat.com>,
"James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
open-iscsi@...glegroups.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Wu Bo <wubo40@...wei.com>, Zhiqiang Liu <liuzhiqiang26@...wei.com>,
linfeilong@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] scsi:libiscsi: teardown iscsi_cls_conn gracefully
On 3/8/22 9:09 PM, Wenchao Hao wrote:
> @@ -3143,8 +3145,6 @@ void iscsi_conn_teardown(struct iscsi_cls_conn *cls_conn)
> mutex_unlock(&session->eh_mutex);
>
> iscsi_destroy_conn(cls_conn);
This should then be a iscsi_put_conn.
So basically it balances out.
iscsi_alloc_conn requires iscsi_put_conn. The put releases what is
done in the alloc. The put on the parent is done in the release though.
iscsi_add_conn requires iscsi_remove_conn. The remove undoes what
was done in the add
We don't want a iscsi_destroy_conn which does a iscsi_free_conn
because it makes it confusing.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists