From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 14:01:56 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A701065670; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:01:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iw0-f185.google.com (mail-iw0-f185.google.com [209.85.223.185]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1757F8FC26; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:01:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iwn15 with SMTP id 15so1063294iwn.7 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:01:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=3PupD9xAVI1R+Pi8o6F51wfQ8usucqwAYNpYBBi4XWY=; b=WMwDNv3O/j+24RBlSfEjDK0GbUKb/eptabne8dY+Zyq+EMsr+U78uXjE0kANMu6UjR ImeczUzTB5HQZ+Mkluj1WPCUwgQRPOpPyERQqnc/6LZW2sLn1kqjajwPTpHrRtgJ+oZn 9iydMJVN3F1cqAgr4ONwzs135Q3jPk9VDdbAY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=Fv/l/bdSAGJYUDqOVeZcauHOCmz+4S2ngoCQbw1fFcDSxg4PTzMWRloWiR+Mczn/Z3 5MLUQs9Ns3TXcGElGV0kT5GAvB3NOJjYf2tNloZj1ImOUCJdIaVULieU/GaFlFp4N6NM AS3BXlHiQZQ6Qlr4h9ZKDKsOjNLJlLS/jtF0k= MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: asmrookie@gmail.com Received: by 10.231.191.147 with SMTP id dm19mr41534ibb.86.1268402514865; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:01:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe11003041737p30690522ya81e1b8f4bd6bbf9@mail.gmail.com> References: <3bbf2fe11002281655i61a5f0a0if3f381ad0c4a1ef8@mail.gmail.com> <3bbf2fe11003031357o518d6028m8157d9110a9122f3@mail.gmail.com> <4B8EF128.8050704@feral.com> <3bbf2fe11003031532u2207eb55h19c3a045215a7d84@mail.gmail.com> <4B8EF336.80107@feral.com> <3bbf2fe11003031547kd5f7314t3d83b2bde06c1c2f@mail.gmail.com> <4B8EF990.5030407@feral.com> <3bbf2fe11003031607wa3727b5ke89bc2a909d4d6a6@mail.gmail.com> <4B901419.8060800@feral.com> <3bbf2fe11003041737p30690522ya81e1b8f4bd6bbf9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:01:54 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: df21b1c7ede34370 Message-ID: <3bbf2fe11003120601y3c403a1ct50f9fc6c1f0903bf@mail.gmail.com> From: Attilio Rao To: mj@feral.com, Alexander Motin , "Justin T. Gibbs" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How is supposed to be protected the units list? X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:01:56 -0000 2010/3/5 Attilio Rao : > 2010/3/4 Matthew Jacob : >> The referred to patch at least got me out of panic case :-).. >> >> >> http://people.freebsd.org/~mjacob/scsi_da.c.patch > > Yes, honestly the main intent of this patch is to offer a stable > ground for correct handling of periph. When looking about refcounting > them correctly, the main problem is that there was no initial > condition assuring safety, and the initial patch should address this, > but I'm sure there are places where periph refcount is not handled > correctly and this may be one. So, as long as it seems nobody had a strong argument against this patch, what do you think about me committing it? We can further refine later if we think it is the case. Also, I think that Matt's patch should be committed just after this one (and possibly we should investigate a similar add-on for the ata counterpart too?). Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein