| Message ID | 20200702013210.22958-1-stanley.chu@mediatek.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [RFC,v1] scsi: ufs: Quiesce all scsi devices before shutdown | expand |
On 2020-07-01 18:32, Stanley Chu wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > index 59358bb75014..cadfa9006972 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > @@ -8599,10 +8599,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(ufshcd_runtime_idle); > int ufshcd_shutdown(struct ufs_hba *hba) > { > int ret = 0; > + struct scsi_target *starget; > > if (!hba->is_powered) > goto out; > > + list_for_each_entry(starget, &hba->host->__targets, siblings) > + scsi_target_quiesce(starget); > + > if (ufshcd_is_ufs_dev_poweroff(hba) && ufshcd_is_link_off(hba)) > goto out; Please add a comment above the list_for_each_entry() loop that explains that there is no matching scsi_target_unquiesce() call and also that SCSI commands queued after the scsi_target_quiesce() call returned will block until blk_cleanup_queue() is called (see also the blk_queue_dying() check in blk_queue_enter()). Thanks, Bart.
Hi Bart, On Wed, 2020-07-01 at 20:02 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 2020-07-01 18:32, Stanley Chu wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > > index 59358bb75014..cadfa9006972 100644 > > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > > @@ -8599,10 +8599,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(ufshcd_runtime_idle); > > int ufshcd_shutdown(struct ufs_hba *hba) > > { > > int ret = 0; > > + struct scsi_target *starget; > > > > if (!hba->is_powered) > > goto out; > > > > + list_for_each_entry(starget, &hba->host->__targets, siblings) > > + scsi_target_quiesce(starget); > > + > > if (ufshcd_is_ufs_dev_poweroff(hba) && ufshcd_is_link_off(hba)) > > goto out; > > Please add a comment above the list_for_each_entry() loop that explains > that there is no matching scsi_target_unquiesce() call and also that > SCSI commands queued after the scsi_target_quiesce() call returned will > block until blk_cleanup_queue() is called (see also the blk_queue_dying() > check in blk_queue_enter()). Thanks for the review. I'll add above comments in RFC v2. Thanks, Stanley Chu
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c index 59358bb75014..cadfa9006972 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c @@ -8599,10 +8599,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(ufshcd_runtime_idle); int ufshcd_shutdown(struct ufs_hba *hba) { int ret = 0; + struct scsi_target *starget; if (!hba->is_powered) goto out; + list_for_each_entry(starget, &hba->host->__targets, siblings) + scsi_target_quiesce(starget); + if (ufshcd_is_ufs_dev_poweroff(hba) && ufshcd_is_link_off(hba)) goto out;
Currently I/O request could be still submitted to UFS device while UFS is working on shutdown flow. This may lead to racing as below scenarios and finally system may crash due to unclocked register accesses. To fix this kind of issues, specifically quiesce all SCSI devices before UFS shutdown to block all I/O request sending from block layer. Example of racing scenario: While UFS device is runtime-suspended Thread #1: Executing UFS shutdown flow, e.g., ufshcd_suspend(UFS_SHUTDOWN_PM) Thread #2: Executing runtime resume flow triggered by I/O request, e.g., ufshcd_resume(UFS_RUNTIME_PM) This breaks the assumption that UFS PM flows can not be running concurrently and thus some unexpected racing behavior may happen. Signed-off-by: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com> --- drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)