Skip to contentSkip to conversation

NVMe: Fix FS mount issue(hot-remove followed by hot-add)

PATCH New Indraneel M 2 participants 4 messages Dec 11, 2014 – Dec 12, 2014

Subsystems (2)
Block layer NVMe
lore
Share & tools
lore

Indraneel M

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 NVMe: Fix FS mount issue(hot-remove followed by hot-add)

Jens, this version is against the linux-block tree.

After Hot-remove of a device with a mounted partition, when the device is hot-added again, the new node reappears as nvme0n1. Mounting this new node fails with the error:

mount: mount /dev/nvme0n1p1 on /mnt failed: File exists.

The old nodes's FS entries still exist and the kernel can't re-create procfs and sysfs entries for the new node with the same name. The patch fixes this issue.

Signed-off-by Indraneel M <indraneel.m at samsung.com>
drivers/block/nvme-core.c +1 -1
index e2bb8af..a14e90f 100644
@@ -2600,6 +2600,7 @@ static void nvme_free_dev(struct kref *kref)
 	struct nvme_dev *dev = container_of(kref, struct nvme_dev, kref);
 
 	nvme_free_namespaces(dev);
+	nvme_release_instance(dev);
 	free_percpu(dev->io_queue);
 	kfree(dev->queues);
 	kfree(dev->entry);

@@ -2859,7 +2860,6 @@ static void nvme_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
 	nvme_dev_shutdown(dev);
 	nvme_free_queues(dev, 0);
 	rcu_barrier();
-	nvme_release_instance(dev);
 	nvme_release_prp_pools(dev);
 	kref_put(&dev->kref, nvme_free_dev);
 }
Signature · 1 line
1.8.3.2
maintainer
#1 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 NVMe: Fix FS mount issue(hot-remove followed by hot-add)

Quoted 1 line · Indraneel M

Jens, this version is against the linux-block tree.

It's not, though:

checking file drivers/block/nvme-core.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 2600.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 2859.
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED

what branch are you on? It has to be against for-3.19/drivers or for-next. This was simple enough to hand apply, so I did that. This is the result:

http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-block.git;a=commit;h=285dffc9101244ac65c29672a1fb3fe614b52238

Signature · 1 line
Jens Axboe
author
#2 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 NVMe: Fix FS mount issue(hot-remove followed by hot-add)

Quoted 11 lines

-----Original Message-----
From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Jens Axboe
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 8:56 PM
To: Indraneel M; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org; Keith Busch
Subject: Re: [PATCH][linux-block] NVMe: Fix FS mount issue(hot-remove followed by hot-add)

Quoted 1 line · Indraneel M

Jens, this version is against the linux-block tree.

Quoted 8 lines

It's not, though:

checking file drivers/block/nvme-core.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 2600.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 2859.
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED

what branch are you on? It has to be against for-3.19/drivers or for-next.

This

Quoted 4 lines

was simple enough to hand apply, so I did that. This is the result:

http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-
block.git;a=commit;h=285dffc9101244ac65c29672a1fb3fe614b52238

Thanks Jens! I had just cloned linux-block and created a patch against it without any branch switch.

Quoted 9 lines

--
Jens Axboe

_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme

maintainer
#3 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 NVMe: Fix FS mount issue(hot-remove followed by hot-add)

Quoted 20 lines · Indraneel Mukherjee
Quoted 11 lines

-----Original Message-----
From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Jens Axboe
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 8:56 PM
To: Indraneel M; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org; Keith Busch
Subject: Re: [PATCH][linux-block] NVMe: Fix FS mount issue(hot-remove followed by hot-add)

Quoted 1 line · Indraneel M

Jens, this version is against the linux-block tree.

Quoted 8 lines

It's not, though:

checking file drivers/block/nvme-core.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 2600.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 2859.
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED

what branch are you on? It has to be against for-3.19/drivers or for-next.

This

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines

was simple enough to hand apply, so I did that. This is the result:

http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-
block.git;a=commit;h=285dffc9101244ac65c29672a1fb3fe614b52238

Thanks Jens! I had just cloned linux-block and created a patch against it without any branch switch.

It's not easy to know... Generally, if we're before a merge window, patches should be sent against for-3.x/drivers, where x is the next release. If we're after a merge window and it needs to go into this version, then patches should be against for-linus (which is generally pretty close to master).

Signature · 1 line
Jens Axboe