lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Issue with qla2xxx_probe_one
Andrew Vasquez wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Alan D. Brunelle wrote:
>
>> I /think/ that there is an issue with this routine /if/ the firmware
>> images are not loaded properly - on a 16-way ia64 box I am starting to
>> see this with an up-stream kernel (Jens Axboe's origin/io-cpu-affinity
>> branch). In any event, it looks to me that :
>>
>> if (qla2x00_initialize_adapter(ha)) {
>> qla_printk(KERN_WARNING, ha,
>> "Failed to initialize adapter\n");
>>
>> DEBUG2(printk("scsi(%ld): Failed to initialize
adapter - "
>> "Adapter flags %x.\n",
>> ha->host_no, ha->device_flags));
>>
>> ret = -ENODEV;
>> goto probe_failed;
>> }
>>
>> skips around:
>>
>> ret = scsi_add_host(host, &pdev->dev);
>>
>> which is needed to properly initialize the freelist (via:
>> scsi_setup_command_freelist).
>
> Wasn't something like this posted recently to linux-scsi:
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/27/333
>
> this is sitting in scsi-misc-2.6.git:
>
> [SCSI] bug fix for free list handling
>
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi-misc-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=a79cbe1aa5dd695f0ee012ecde1ff88b1192e326
>
> which I gather will be pushed soon...

My apologies for not having seeing that.

But after looking at it, doesn't it still have a hole?

o scsi_setup_command_freelist initializes the free_list list.

o It then invokes scsi_get_host_cmd_pool, if this fails there is no
need to invoke scsi_put_host_cmd_pool (it wasn't gotten).

o If scsi_get_host_cmd_pool succeeds but scsi_pool_alloc_command fails,
it will (correctly) invoke scsi_put_host_cmd_pool.

However, if either of scsi_get_host_cmd_pool or scsi_put_host_cmd_pool
happens to fail, we'll end up in scsi_destroy_command_freelist - and
since the free_list was initialized, the while loop will be bypassed,
but scsi_put_host_cmd_pool will be invoked an extra time. And this is
badness, right?

Wouldn't the attached patch [boot tested on my previously failing
system] be correct (and perhaps cleaner - you're not looking at the
innards of the list data structure to determine things)?

Alan
From 344f31749fe26fe8b56fcd6ff3f3902cedb8144c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alan D. Brunelle <alan.brunelle@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:46:36 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Ensure proper handling of the scsi free_list handling upon errors

Only release resources in scsi_destroy_command_freelist that have been
correctly initialized.

Signed-off-by: Alan D. Brunelle <alan.brunelle@hp.com>
---
drivers/scsi/scsi.c | 8 ++++++++
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi.c
index 12d69d7..749c9c7 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi.c
@@ -469,6 +469,7 @@ int scsi_setup_command_freelist(struct Scsi_Host *shost)
cmd = scsi_pool_alloc_command(shost->cmd_pool, gfp_mask);
if (!cmd) {
scsi_put_host_cmd_pool(gfp_mask);
+ shost->cmd_pool = NULL;
return -ENOMEM;
}
list_add(&cmd->list, &shost->free_list);
@@ -481,6 +482,13 @@ int scsi_setup_command_freelist(struct Scsi_Host *shost)
*/
void scsi_destroy_command_freelist(struct Scsi_Host *shost)
{
+ /*
+ * If cmd_pool is NULL the free list was not initialized, so
+ * do not attempt to release resources.
+ */
+ if (!shost->cmd_pool)
+ return;
+
while (!list_empty(&shost->free_list)) {
struct scsi_cmnd *cmd;

--
1.5.4.3
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-29 22:17    [W:0.062 / U:0.264 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site