On 08/31/12 20:00, dongsu.p...@profitbricks.com wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
> b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
> index 1b274484..ba7bbfd 100644
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
> @@ -647,9 +647,19 @@ static void srp_remove_work(struct work_struct *work)
>
> static void srp_rport_delete(struct srp_rport *rport)
> {
> - struct srp_target_port *target = rport->lld_data;
> + struct srp_target_port *target;
> +
> + if (!rport->lld_data) {
> + pr_warn("skipping srp_rport_delete. rport->lld_data=%p\n",
> + rport->lld_data);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + target = rport->lld_data;
>
> srp_queue_remove_work(target);
> +
> + rport->lld_data = NULL;
> }
>
> /**
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c
> b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c
> index af3cb56..915b355 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c
> @@ -272,6 +272,12 @@ static void rport_dev_loss_timedout(struct work_struct
> *work)
> struct Scsi_Host *shost;
> struct srp_internal *i;
>
> + if (!rport->lld_data) {
> + pr_warn("skipping rport_delete, rport->lld_data=%p\n",
> + rport->lld_data);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> pr_err("SRP transport: dev_loss_tmo (%ds) expired - removing %s.\n",
> rport->dev_loss_tmo, dev_name(&rport->dev));
>
The above changes look harmless to me. But what I'd really like to know
is whether the pr_warn() statements added by this patch have been hit
after testing with patch [5/5] started ? The srp-ha patch series has
been designed such that rport->lld_data != NULL as long as the rport
data structure exists.
Bart.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
