On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 04:22:50PM -0700, Vasu Dev wrote: > On Fri, 2014-05-30 at 10:59 -0400, Neil Horman wrote: > > debugfs caught this: > > WARNING: at lib/debugobjects.c:260 debug_print_object+0x83/0xa0() > > ODEBUG: free active (active state 0) object type: work_struct > > hint: fc_scsi_scan_rport+0x0/0xd0 [scsi_transport_fc] > > CPU: 1 PID: 184 Comm: kworker/1:1 Tainted: G W > > -------------- 3.10.0-123.el7.x86_64.debug #1 > > Hardware name: HP ProLiant DL120 G7, BIOS J01 07/01/2013 > > Workqueue: fc_wq_5 fc_rport_final_delete [scsi_transport_fc] > > Call Trace: > > [<ffffffff8169efec>] dump_stack+0x19/0x1b > > [<ffffffff8106cbd1>] warn_slowpath_common+0x61/0x80 > > [<ffffffff8106cc4c>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x5c/0x80 > > [<ffffffff8133e003>] debug_print_object+0x83/0xa0 > > [<ffffffffa04e2f40>] ? fc_parse_wwn+0x100/0x100 > > > > [<ffffffff8133f23b>] debug_check_no_obj_freed+0x22b/0x270 > > [<ffffffffa04e127e>] ? fc_rport_dev_release+0x1e/0x30 > > [<ffffffff811db3e9>] kfree+0xd9/0x2d0 > > [<ffffffffa04e127e>] fc_rport_dev_release+0x1e/0x30 > > [<ffffffff81428032>] device_release+0x32/0xa0 > > [<ffffffff8132701e>] kobject_release+0x7e/0x1b0 > > [<ffffffff81326ed8>] kobject_put+0x28/0x60 > > [<ffffffff81428397>] put_device+0x17/0x20 > > [<ffffffffa04e5025>] fc_rport_final_delete+0x165/0x210 > > [<ffffffff810959b0>] process_one_work+0x220/0x710 > > [<ffffffff81095944>] ? process_one_work+0x1b4/0x710 > > [<ffffffff81095fbb>] worker_thread+0x11b/0x3a0 > > [<ffffffff81095ea0>] ? process_one_work+0x710/0x710 > > [<ffffffff8109e0cd>] kthread+0xed/0x100 > > [<ffffffff8109dfe0>] ? insert_kthread_work+0x80/0x80 > > [<ffffffff816b2fec>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0 > > [<ffffffff8109dfe0>] ? insert_kthread_work+0x80/0x80 > > > > Seems to be because the scan_work work_struct might be active when the > > housing > > fc_rport struct gets freed. Ensure that we cancel it prior to freeing the > > rport > > > > Signed-off-by: Neil Horman <nhor...@tuxdriver.com> > > CC: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org > > CC: Robert Love <robert.w.l...@intel.com> > > CC: Vasu Dev <vasu....@intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c > > b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c > > index 4628fd5..5bd552c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c > > @@ -2548,6 +2548,7 @@ fc_rport_final_delete(struct work_struct *work) > > fc_flush_devloss(shost); > > if (!cancel_delayed_work(&rport->dev_loss_work)) > > fc_flush_devloss(shost); > > + cancel_work_sync(&rport->scan_work); > > Make sense to ensure pending work canceled, adding James Smart for his > ACK as transport FC class author. > > > Reviewed-by: Vasu Dev <vasu....@intel.com> > Ping on this, Something just occured to me. I was thinking (perhaps erroneously) that this would go through the FCoE tree, but I don't see that you've setup a tree yet vasu (and Rob's has been idle for 6 months). Whats the plan for this (and future) fcoe patchs. Will you have a tree, or will we send this through Christophs new scsi tree perhaps?
Neil > > > spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags); > > rport->flags &= ~FC_RPORT_DEVLOSS_PENDING; > > } > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
