| Message ID | 20190315232758.221199-1-bvanassche@acm.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Mainlined |
| Commit | 17605afaae825b0291f80c62a7f6565879edaa8a |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Avoid that a kernel warning appears during system resume | expand |
Hi Bart. Bart Van Assche - 16.03.19, 00:27: > Since scsi_device_quiesce() skips SCSI devices that have another state > than RUNNING, OFFLINE or TRANSPORT_OFFLINE, scsi_device_resume() > should not complain about SCSI devices that have been skipped. Hence > this patch. This patch avoids that the following warning appears > during resume: Am I on CC cause one of those warnings appeared in bug reports from me from quite some time ago? > WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 1039 at blk_clear_pm_only+0x2a/0x30 > CPU: 3 PID: 1039 Comm: kworker/u8:49 Not tainted 5.0.0+ #1 > Hardware name: LENOVO 4180F42/4180F42, BIOS 83ET75WW (1.45 ) This at least does not appear to be this ThinkPad T520, as I have BIOS version 1.49 already. Thanks and have good weekend, Martin > 05/10/2013 Workqueue: events_unbound async_run_entry_fn > RIP: 0010:blk_clear_pm_only+0x2a/0x30 > Call Trace: > ? scsi_device_resume+0x28/0x50 > ? scsi_dev_type_resume+0x2b/0x80 > ? async_run_entry_fn+0x2c/0xd0 > ? process_one_work+0x1f0/0x3f0 > ? worker_thread+0x28/0x3c0 > ? process_one_work+0x3f0/0x3f0 > ? kthread+0x10c/0x130 > ? __kthread_create_on_node+0x150/0x150 > ? ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 > > Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > Cc: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com> > Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com> > Cc: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de> > Cc: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name> > Cc: Martin Steigerwald <martin@lichtvoll.de> > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> > Reported-by: Jisheng Zhang <Jisheng.Zhang@synaptics.com> > Tested-by: Jisheng Zhang <Jisheng.Zhang@synaptics.com> > Fixes: 3a0a529971ec ("block, scsi: Make SCSI quiesce and resume work > reliably") # v4.15 Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche > <bvanassche@acm.org> > --- > drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c > index 324f830ee9fa..54ad751b42b8 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c > @@ -2541,8 +2541,10 @@ void scsi_device_resume(struct scsi_device > *sdev) * device deleted during suspend) > */ > mutex_lock(&sdev->state_mutex); > - sdev->quiesced_by = NULL; > - blk_clear_pm_only(sdev->request_queue); > + if (sdev->quiesced_by) { > + sdev->quiesced_by = NULL; > + blk_clear_pm_only(sdev->request_queue); > + } > if (sdev->sdev_state == SDEV_QUIESCE) > scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_RUNNING); > mutex_unlock(&sdev->state_mutex);
On 3/16/19 3:43 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Bart Van Assche - 16.03.19, 00:27: >> Since scsi_device_quiesce() skips SCSI devices that have another state >> than RUNNING, OFFLINE or TRANSPORT_OFFLINE, scsi_device_resume() >> should not complain about SCSI devices that have been skipped. Hence >> this patch. This patch avoids that the following warning appears >> during resume: > > Am I on CC cause one of those warnings appeared in bug reports from me > from quite some time ago? Hi Martin, That's correct. I hope that you don't mind that I cc'ed you? >> WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 1039 at blk_clear_pm_only+0x2a/0x30 >> CPU: 3 PID: 1039 Comm: kworker/u8:49 Not tainted 5.0.0+ #1 >> Hardware name: LENOVO 4180F42/4180F42, BIOS 83ET75WW (1.45 ) > > This at least does not appear to be this ThinkPad T520, as I have BIOS > version 1.49 already. The call trace in the patch description is only an example. I think the problem description and the patch applies to all systems that have one or more SCSI disks. Best regards, Bart.
Hi Bart. Bart Van Assche - 16.03.19, 22:28: > On 3/16/19 3:43 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Bart Van Assche - 16.03.19, 00:27: > >> Since scsi_device_quiesce() skips SCSI devices that have another > >> state than RUNNING, OFFLINE or TRANSPORT_OFFLINE, > >> scsi_device_resume() should not complain about SCSI devices that > >> have been skipped. Hence this patch. This patch avoids that the > >> following warning appears> > >> during resume: > > Am I on CC cause one of those warnings appeared in bug reports from > > me from quite some time ago? […] > That's correct. I hope that you don't mind that I cc'ed you? No, I don't mind. Would you like me to apply the patch in order to test it? As it is just about suppressing a kernel warning and not changing any major functionality, I wondered whether you like me to do with this or whether the CC is more JFYI. > >> WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 1039 at blk_clear_pm_only+0x2a/0x30 > >> CPU: 3 PID: 1039 Comm: kworker/u8:49 Not tainted 5.0.0+ #1 > >> Hardware name: LENOVO 4180F42/4180F42, BIOS 83ET75WW (1.45 ) > > > > This at least does not appear to be this ThinkPad T520, as I have > > BIOS version 1.49 already. > > The call trace in the patch description is only an example. I think > the problem description and the patch applies to all systems that > have one or more SCSI disks. Best,
On 3/17/19 7:20 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Bart Van Assche - 16.03.19, 22:28: >> On 3/16/19 3:43 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: >>> Bart Van Assche - 16.03.19, 00:27: >>>> Since scsi_device_quiesce() skips SCSI devices that have another >>>> state than RUNNING, OFFLINE or TRANSPORT_OFFLINE, >>>> scsi_device_resume() should not complain about SCSI devices that >>>> have been skipped. Hence this patch. This patch avoids that the >>>> following warning appears> >>>> during resume: >>> Am I on CC cause one of those warnings appeared in bug reports from >>> me from quite some time ago? > […] >> That's correct. I hope that you don't mind that I cc'ed you? > > No, I don't mind. > > Would you like me to apply the patch in order to test it? As it is just > about suppressing a kernel warning and not changing any major > functionality, I wondered whether you like me to do with this or whether > the CC is more JFYI. Hi Martin, I had cc'd you in case you would have hit the same warning. If you have not yet encountered this warning it's probably not that important that you test this patch. Best regards, Bart.
Bart, > Since scsi_device_quiesce() skips SCSI devices that have another state > than RUNNING, OFFLINE or TRANSPORT_OFFLINE, scsi_device_resume() > should not complain about SCSI devices that have been skipped. Hence > this patch. This patch avoids that the following warning appears > during resume: Applied to 5.1/scsi-fixes, thanks!
On 3/24/19 5:38 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > [This is an automated email] > > This commit has been processed because it contains a "Fixes:" tag, > fixing commit: 3a0a529971ec block, scsi: Make SCSI quiesce and resume work reliably. > > The bot has tested the following trees: v5.0.3, v4.19.30. > > v5.0.3: Build OK! > v4.19.30: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: > cd84a62e0078 ("block, scsi: Change the preempt-only flag into a counter") > > > How should we proceed with this patch? I think if you want to backport that patch that you will also have to backport commit cd84a62e0078 ("block, scsi: Change the preempt-only flag into a counter") (kernel v4.20). Bart.
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c index 324f830ee9fa..54ad751b42b8 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c @@ -2541,8 +2541,10 @@ void scsi_device_resume(struct scsi_device *sdev) * device deleted during suspend) */ mutex_lock(&sdev->state_mutex); - sdev->quiesced_by = NULL; - blk_clear_pm_only(sdev->request_queue); + if (sdev->quiesced_by) { + sdev->quiesced_by = NULL; + blk_clear_pm_only(sdev->request_queue); + } if (sdev->sdev_state == SDEV_QUIESCE) scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_RUNNING); mutex_unlock(&sdev->state_mutex);