All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Bottomley <jbottomley@parallels.com>
To: "hare@suse.de" <hare@suse.de>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"emilne@redhat.com" <emilne@redhat.com>,
	"Elliott@hp.com" <Elliott@hp.com>,
	"scameron@beardog.cce.hp.com" <scameron@beardog.cce.hp.com>,
	"hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: scsi error handling thread and REQUEST SENSE
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 13:41:59 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1400506919.24320.1.camel@dabdike> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5379C1B2.2040600@suse.de>


On Mon, 2014-05-19 at 10:32 +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 05/16/2014 10:05 PM, Ewan Milne wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 19:02 +0000, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
> > wrote:
> >> There is an issue with a command timeout followed by a failed
> >> abort in the linux SCSI stack.
> >
> > This might explain some  odd crashes I've seen, where it looks like
> > a command might have completed *long* after it should have timed out.
> > I have a few questions, see below:
> >
> >>
> >> After triggering a timeout on a command like:
> >> [ 5454.196861] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] Done: TIMEOUT
> >> [ 5454.196863] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_OK
> >> [ 5454.196866] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] CDB: Mode Sense(10): 5a 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 04 00
> >>
> >> scsi_times_out() invokes scsi_abort_command():
> >> [ 5454.196880] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] scmd ffff880428963a70 abort scheduled
> >>
> >> and scmd_eh_abort_handler() tries to abort the command:
> >> [ 5454.206828] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] aborting command ffff880428963a70
> >>
> >> If the abort fails (with return value FAILED (0x2003 == 8195)):
> >> [ 5454.206832] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] scmd ffff880428963a70 abort failed, rtn 8195
> >>
> >> then scmd_eh_abort_handler() just gives up and expects the error
> >> handler thread to deal with the problem.
> >>
> >> When that thread (scsi_error_handler()) wakes up later on, it finds
> >> this command (and others) outstanding:
> >> [ 5454.373581] scsi_eh_2: waking up 0/3/3
> >> [ 5454.375037] sd 2:0:0:1: scsi_eh_prt_fail_stats: cmds failed: 1, cancel: 0
> >> [ 5454.377332] sd 2:0:0:11: scsi_eh_prt_fail_stats: cmds failed: 2, cancel: 0
> >> [ 5454.379779] Total of 3 commands on 2 devices require eh work
> >>
> >> For each command, it starts with this check:
> >>
> >> #define SCSI_SENSE_VALID(scmd) \
> >>          (((scmd)->sense_buffer[0] & 0x70) == 0x70)
> >>
> >>                  if ((scmd->eh_eflags & SCSI_EH_CANCEL_CMD) ||
> >>                      SCSI_SENSE_VALID(scmd))
> >>                          continue;
> >>
> >> In this case, that if statement fails.  The eflags bit is not
> >> set, and the sense data buffer still contains zeros or garbage -
> >> the command is still outstanding, so the buffer might be written
> >> at any time.
> >>
> >> (the sense buffer shouldn't be read unless a valid bit says
> >> it's filled in, and this lacks support for descriptor format
> >> sense data (type 0x72), but those are side issues)
> >
> > Doesn't the check for:   (byte[0] & 0x70) == 0x70   cover 0x70 - 0x73?
> >
> >>
> >> Strangely, the error handler code (scsi_unjam_host()) proceeds
> >> to send a REQUEST SENSE command and sees the resulting sense
> >> key of NO SENSE:
> >>
> >> [ 5454.381659] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] scsi_eh_2: requesting sense
> >> [ 5454.383597] scsi_eh_done scmd: ffff880428963a70 result: 0
> >> [ 5454.385457] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] Done: UNKNOWN
> >> [ 5454.387430] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_OK
> >> [ 5454.390450] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] CDB: Request Sense: 03 00 00 00 60 00
> >> [ 5454.393497] scsi_send_eh_cmnd: scmd: ffff880428963a70, timeleft: 9998
> >> [ 5454.395667] scsi_send_eh_cmnd: scsi_eh_completed_normally 2002
> >> [ 5454.397842] sense requested for ffff880428963a70 result 0
> >> [ 5454.399675] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] Sense Key : No Sense [current]
> >> [ 5454.402570] sd 2:0:0:1: [sds] Add. Sense: No additional sense information
> >
> > So, a command timed out, the abort didn't succeed, but a
> > REQUEST SENSE completed normally?
> >
> > What kernel was this?  Did it have the change to issue the abort
> > in the timeout handler rather than the EH thread?  It seems like
> > it does, based on your description above.  However, I'm wondering
> > because I have seen crashes on kernels both with and without that
> > change.
> >
> >>
> >> The bogus "UNKNOWN" print is being fixed by Hannes' logging
> >> patch. It just means the REQUEST SENSE command was submitted
> >> successfully.
> >>
> >> This device uses autosense, so REQUEST SENSE is not a valid way
> >> to find out any information for the timed out command. There is
> >> no contingent allegiance condition stalling the queue until
> >> REQUEST SENSE comes along to collect the sense data - that
> >> parallel SCSI concept went obsolete in SAM-3 revision 5 in
> >> January 2003.
> >>
> >> The command is still outstanding; data transfers might still occur,
> >> and a completion using its tag could still appear at any time.
> >> However, the error handler declares that the command is done,
> >> so all the buffers are freed and the tag is reused.
> >>
> >> The SCSI error handler needs to escalate this to a reset that
> >> ensures that the command is no longer outstanding: ABORT
> >> TASK (which already didn't work), ABORT TASK SET, LOGICAL
> >> UNIT RESET, I_T NEXUS RESET, or hard reset.
> >
> > What is supposed to happen is that the EH will escalate and
> > eventually reset the HBA if all else fails.  It definitely
> > should not be returning the scmd if the LLD is still using it.
> >
> Well, problem here is that the 'REQUEST SENSE' command has two problems:
> a) Most modern HBA (ie all non-SPI HBAs) use autosense, ie the sense 
> code is returned with the command. So issuing 'REQUEST SENSE' here 
> is pointless.
> b) The sense code (when retrieved via 'REQUEST SENSE') relates to 
> the most recently processed command (from the target perspective).
> Which is a bit hard to make out, as by the time SCSI EH starts
> several other commands might have been processed already, so any
> sense we'd be retrieving most likely does not relate to the failed 
> command.
> 
> I would propose to disable the 'REQUEST_SENSE' step as soon as the 
> HBA is capable of autosensing. We requires us to add another flag
> to the scsi_host field.
> 
> What about the attached patch? That should roughly do what's 
> required here, right?

This patch shouldn't be necessary at all.  A driver with autosense
returning check condition should already have collected the sense, so we
should succeed in the first if condition

		if ((scmd->eh_eflags & SCSI_EH_CANCEL_CMD) ||
		    SCSI_SENSE_VALID(scmd))
			continue;

If we drop through, the return code shouldn't be CHECK_CONDITION, so it
should get kicked out here:

		if (status_byte(scmd->result) != CHECK_CONDITION)
			/*
			 * don't request sense if there's no check condition
			 * status because the error we're processing isn't one
			 * that has a sense code (and some devices get
			 * confused by sense requests out of the blue)
			 */
			continue;

However, that last bit is a recent introduction:


commit d555a2abf3481f81303d835046a5ec2c4fb3ca8e
Author: James Bottomley <JBottomley@Parallels.com>
Date:   Fri Mar 28 10:50:17 2014 -0700

    [SCSI] Fix spurious request sense in error handling

So if the problem occurred before that patch, it may be fixed by it.

James


  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-05-19 13:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-05-16 19:02 scsi error handling thread and REQUEST SENSE Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-05-16 20:05 ` Ewan Milne
2014-05-19  8:32   ` Hannes Reinecke
2014-05-19 10:29     ` Bart Van Assche
2014-05-19 10:37       ` Hannes Reinecke
2014-05-19 11:26         ` Bart Van Assche
2014-05-19 13:41     ` James Bottomley [this message]
2014-05-19 15:15       ` Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-05-19 11:40 ` Bart Van Assche

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1400506919.24320.1.camel@dabdike \
    --to=jbottomley@parallels.com \
    --cc=Elliott@hp.com \
    --cc=emilne@redhat.com \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=scameron@beardog.cce.hp.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.