Ishai> As I told you before, your patch looks correct. Are you
Ishai> going to apply it?
Sorry, I committed it to git but forgot to check it into svn. (One
more reason to stop maintaining kernel drivers in svn)
- R.
___
openib-general mailing
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 02:55:57AM +0300, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * We need 2 scsi_host_put becuase there are two get:
> > + * in scsi_host_alloc and in scsi_add_host
> > + */
> > + scsi_host_p
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 02:55:57AM +0300, Roland Dreier wrote:
> Hmm, this doesn't seem right to me. If I try this, then I get a crash
> because the scsi_host is already gone after the first put. I verified
> that the reference count is 1 before these puts, and with the
> unmodified module I don'
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 02:56:58AM +0300, Roland Dreier wrote:
> BTW, I think the patch below is correct as well. This avoids problems
> where the SRP driver waits forever for a completion, for example if
> sending the DREQ fails because the connection has already been
> disconnected by the target
BTW, I think the patch below is correct as well. This avoids problems
where the SRP driver waits forever for a completion, for example if
sending the DREQ fails because the connection has already been
disconnected by the target.
Does this scenario seem like the deadlock you thought you saw?
---
> +/*
> + * We need 2 scsi_host_put becuase there are two get:
> + * in scsi_host_alloc and in scsi_add_host
> + */
> +scsi_host_put(target->scsi_host);
> scsi_host_put(ta
On Sun, May 14, 2006 at 02:02:01PM +0300, Ishai Rabinovitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After loading ib_srp module, adding a target and then unloading the ib_srp
> target the scsi_host directory in /sys/class/scsi_host/ still exists.
> It looks like the srp code does not release the scsi_host it had allocat
Hi,
After loading ib_srp module, adding a target and then unloading the ib_srp
target the scsi_host directory in /sys/class/scsi_host/ still exists.
It looks like the srp code does not release the scsi_host it had allocated.
After examining the code I found out that when executing srp_remove_wor
