[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<SJ0PR11MB5896CEC6CC503E43D7A00D5FC31C2@SJ0PR11MB5896.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 09:37:08 +0000
From: "Karan Tilak Kumar (kartilak)" <kartilak@...co.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
CC: "Sesidhar Baddela (sebaddel)" <sebaddel@...co.com>, "Arulprabhu Ponnusamy
(arulponn)" <arulponn@...co.com>, "Dhanraj Jhawar (djhawar)"
<djhawar@...co.com>, "Gian Carlo Boffa (gcboffa)" <gcboffa@...co.com>, "Masa
Kai (mkai2)" <mkai2@...co.com>, "Satish Kharat (satishkh)"
<satishkh@...co.com>, "Arun Easi (aeasi)" <aeasi@...co.com>,
"jejb@...ux.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>, "martin.petersen@...cle.com"
<martin.petersen@...cle.com>, "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v7 11/15] scsi: fnic: Modify fnic interfaces to use FDLS
On Thursday, January 9, 2025 12:24 AM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 09:40:48PM +0000, Karan Tilak Kumar (kartilak) wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 7, 2025 5:18 AM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org> wrote:
> > > > @@ -1236,8 +1286,10 @@ static void __exit fnic_cleanup_module(void)
> > > > {
> > > > pci_unregister_driver(&fnic_driver);
> > > > destroy_workqueue(fnic_event_queue);
> > > > - if (fnic_fip_queue)
> > > > + if (fnic_fip_queue) {
> > > > + flush_workqueue(fnic_fip_queue);
> > > > destroy_workqueue(fnic_fip_queue);
> > >
> > > I don't think this change is necessary or related. But if it is then it
> > > needs to be split into its own patch with a Fixes tag.
> >
> > Thanks Dan.
> > We believe it is necessary to flush the frames in the fip queue before cleaning up.
> > We would like to keep this as it is.
>
> The issue with the patch is that it should have been split up into
> probably five separate small patches. Each change needs to be considered
> on its own and explained why it's required. This flush_workqueue()
> change wasn't even mentioned in the commit message at all. I don't blame
> *you* for that because you didn't know but someone should have told you.
>
> With regards to flush_workqueue(), I have looked some more today and the
> flush_workqueue() is not required so this chunk does not need to be
> backported to -stable kernels. But if it had been required, there is no
> way we could have done that with it all mixed together with other
> changes.
>
> I think there is a tool out somewhere which complains about code like
> this because I've seen a lot of patches removing the extra call to
> flush_workqueue().
>
> 97d26ae764a4 ("bcache: remove unnecessary flush_workqueue")
> fb4b9685779f ("EDAC/wq: Remove unneeded flush_workqueue()")
> d81c7cdd7a6d ("net/tls: Remove redundant workqueue flush before destroy")
> etc..
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
Thanks for those references, Dan. Appreciate you taking the time to dig them up.
The Cisco team will review this information.
Regards,
Karan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists