Hi Bart,
On Wed, 2020-07-01 at 20:02 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 2020-07-01 18:32, Stanley Chu wrote:
quoted
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
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel