Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1678578 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-06-30 10:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-07-01 23:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
[PATCH 1/2] scsi: lpfc: spin_lock_irq() is not nestable Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> - 2017-06-30 10:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: lpfc: spin_lock_irq() is not nestable James Smart <james.smart@broadcom.com> - 2017-06-30 17:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: lpfc: spin_lock_irq() is not nestable "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com> - 2017-07-01 23:20 +0200
| From | Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-30 10:10 +0200 |
| Subject | [PATCH 1/2] scsi: lpfc: spin_lock_irq() is not nestable |
| Message-ID | <tXZa1-2WX-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
We're calling spin_lock_irq() multiple times, the problem is that on the
first spin_unlock_irq() then we will re-enable IRQs and we don't want
that.
Fixes: 966bb5b71196 ("scsi: lpfc: Break up IO ctx list into a separate get and put list")
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvmet.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvmet.c
index 7dc061a14f95..afc523209845 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvmet.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvmet.c
@@ -866,44 +866,44 @@ lpfc_nvmet_cleanup_io_context(struct lpfc_hba *phba)
unsigned long flags;
spin_lock_irqsave(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_get_lock, flags);
- spin_lock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_put_lock);
+ spin_lock(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_put_lock);
list_for_each_entry_safe(ctx_buf, next_ctx_buf,
&phba->sli4_hba.lpfc_nvmet_ctx_get_list, list) {
- spin_lock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
+ spin_lock(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
list_del_init(&ctx_buf->list);
- spin_unlock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
__lpfc_clear_active_sglq(phba,
ctx_buf->sglq->sli4_lxritag);
ctx_buf->sglq->state = SGL_FREED;
ctx_buf->sglq->ndlp = NULL;
- spin_lock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
+ spin_lock(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
list_add_tail(&ctx_buf->sglq->list,
&phba->sli4_hba.lpfc_nvmet_sgl_list);
- spin_unlock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
lpfc_sli_release_iocbq(phba, ctx_buf->iocbq);
kfree(ctx_buf->context);
}
list_for_each_entry_safe(ctx_buf, next_ctx_buf,
&phba->sli4_hba.lpfc_nvmet_ctx_put_list, list) {
- spin_lock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
+ spin_lock(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
list_del_init(&ctx_buf->list);
- spin_unlock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&phba->sli4_hba.abts_nvme_buf_list_lock);
__lpfc_clear_active_sglq(phba,
ctx_buf->sglq->sli4_lxritag);
ctx_buf->sglq->state = SGL_FREED;
ctx_buf->sglq->ndlp = NULL;
- spin_lock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
+ spin_lock(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
list_add_tail(&ctx_buf->sglq->list,
&phba->sli4_hba.lpfc_nvmet_sgl_list);
- spin_unlock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&phba->sli4_hba.sgl_list_lock);
lpfc_sli_release_iocbq(phba, ctx_buf->iocbq);
kfree(ctx_buf->context);
}
- spin_unlock_irq(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_put_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_put_lock);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&phba->sli4_hba.nvmet_ctx_get_lock, flags);
}
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Smart <james.smart@broadcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-30 17:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tY5yO-6K0-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1678578 |
On 6/30/2017 1:02 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> We're calling spin_lock_irq() multiple times, the problem is that on the
> first spin_unlock_irq() then we will re-enable IRQs and we don't want
> that.
>
> Fixes: 966bb5b71196 ("scsi: lpfc: Break up IO ctx list into a separate get and put list")
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>
looks good.
Signed-off-By: James Smart <james.smart@broadcom.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-01 23:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tYxY5-aB-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1678578 |
Dan, > We're calling spin_lock_irq() multiple times, the problem is that on > the first spin_unlock_irq() then we will re-enable IRQs and we don't > want that. Applied to 4.13/scsi-queue. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web