On 04/10/12 11:14, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 25.09.12 at 19:53, David Vrabel <[email protected]> wrote: >> @@ -1167,7 +1168,8 @@ blkfront_closing(struct blkfront_info *info) >> >> mutex_lock(&bdev->bd_mutex); >> >> - if (bdev->bd_openers) { >> + /* If the backend is already CLOSED, close now. */ >> + if (bdev->bd_openers && backend_state != XenbusStateClosed) { >> xenbus_dev_error(xbdev, -EBUSY, >> "Device in use; refusing to close"); >> xenbus_switch_state(xbdev, XenbusStateClosing); > > This looks wrong to me on a second glance: As long as there > are users of the device, I don't think we want to go into Closed > ourselves, irrespective of the backend state.
Any users of the frontend device are screwed either way, as the backend is gone. It seems sensible to handle this case the same as (e.g.,) a physical unplug of a USB storage device. Removing the device and forcing all outstanding I/O to fail immediately rather than lingering in the rings, going nowhere. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
