Great news, that it works for you!
Thanks a lot!
Pavel
On 11/22/2017 03:49 AM, Stuart Hayes wrote:
My apologies... yes, your patch also fixes my issue. I was looking at the two
new places from which you were calling scsi_eh_wakeup(), and didn't notice that
you moved the spinlock in scsi_devi
My apologies... yes, your patch also fixes my issue. I was looking at the two
new places from which you were calling scsi_eh_wakeup(), and didn't notice that
you moved the spinlock in scsi_device_unbusy()... moving the spinlock in
scsi_device_unbusy() also should the issue I'm seeing, given tha
On Tue, 2017-09-05 at 15:54 +0300, Pavel Tikhomirov wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> index f6097b89d5d3..6c99221d60aa 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> @@ -320,12 +320,11 @@ void scsi_device_unbusy(struct scsi_device *s
JFYI these patch is in Virtuozzo7 kernel from September, and we have no
issues found with it until now by out testing, and initial problem does
not reproduce for 2.5 months.
My patch should also fix your issue too, please see explanation in reply
to your patch. Do your testing show that it doesn't?
Thanks, Pavel.
On 11/21/2017 09:10 AM, Stuart Hayes wrote:
Pavel,
It turns out that the error handler on our systems was not getting woken up for
a different reason..
Pavel,
It turns out that the error handler on our systems was not getting woken up for
a different reason... I submitted a patch earlier today that fixes the issue I
were seeing (I CCed you on the patch).
Before I got my hands on the failing system and was able to root cause it, I
was pretty s
> Are there any issues with this patch
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9938919/) that Pavel Tikhomirov
submitted back in September? I am willing to help if there's anything I
can do to help get it accepted.
Hi, Stuart, I asked James Bottomley about the patch status offlist and
it seems t
Are there any issues with this patch
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9938919/) that Pavel Tikhomirov submitted
back in September? I am willing to help if there's anything I can do to help
get it accepted.
The failing case I'm working on involves lots of servers with disk read/write
activ
ping
On 09/05/2017 03:54 PM, Pavel Tikhomirov wrote:
We have a problem on several our nodes with scsi EH. Imagine such an
order of execution of two threads:
CPU1 scsi_eh_scmd_add CPU2 scsi_host_queue_ready
/* shost->host_busy == 1 initialy */
if (shost
Hi. Please tell if there is something I can do to help the patch get
processed? It is on the list without reply for almost a month.
On 09/05/2017 03:54 PM, Pavel Tikhomirov wrote:
We have a problem on several our nodes with scsi EH. Imagine such an
order of execution of two threads:
CPU1 scsi_
We have a problem on several our nodes with scsi EH. Imagine such an
order of execution of two threads:
CPU1 scsi_eh_scmd_add CPU2 scsi_host_queue_ready
/* shost->host_busy == 1 initialy */
if (shost->shost_state == SHOST_RECOVERY)
11 matches
Mail list logo
