All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
To: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
Cc: "James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <mkp@kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, John Garry <john.garry@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 05/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Report the residual of a write
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 09:15:09 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aroT_W6PzdiUeUBd@ryzen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1dac66aa-a4e6-4c79-a914-d5d2699c392f@kernel.org>

On Mon, Sep 28, 2026 at 08:45:30AM +0200, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 2026/09/27 7:26, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > A write whose data buffer is larger than its transfer length leaves a
> > residual that the initiator is entitled to be told about. resp_read_dt0()
> > and resp_write_tape() report it, but the write paths for a disk do not,
> > so such a write completes with GOOD status and a residual of zero while
> > a READ of the same length into the same buffer reports it correctly.
>
> I am not convinced this is correct. resid (residual count) is supposed to
> indicate the amount of data that was *not* transferred. So if the buffer size is
> larger that the command cdb transfer count, all data can be transferred and
> resid should be 0. Which would mean that for this case, the write processing is
> correct but the read side is not.
>
> The SBC and SPC specs are very silent about this though, I do not think that the
> resid is actually standardized. And I do not see a clear definition for it in
> the documentation/code comments.

The definition is in Documentation/scsi/scsi_mid_low_api.rst,
under resid_len: "an LLD should set this unsigned integer to the requested
transfer length (i.e. 'request_bufflen') less the number of bytes that are
actually transferred".

Also in include/scsi/sg.h: "resid; /* [o] dxfer_len - actual_transferred */".

Both measure it against the buffer, not the CDB.

That is also what iSCSI reports: RFC 7143 11.4.5.1 measures the residual
against the Expected Data Transfer Length, which the initiator sets from the
buffer.

And it is what scsi_debug has always done for reads, in fill_from_dev_buffer().
This patch just does the same for writes.


Let me clarify the commit message in v10 to actually reference
Documentation/scsi/scsi_mid_low_api.rst.


Kind regards,
Niklas

  reply	other threads:[~2026-09-28  7:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-27  5:26 [PATCH v9 00/11] scsi: scsi_debug: fix zoned write validation Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:26 ` [PATCH v9 01/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Refuse a zoned device with a non-zero lowest aligned LBA Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:26 ` [PATCH v9 02/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Make atomic writes and ZBC emulation mutually exclusive Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:26 ` [PATCH v9 03/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Take the zone metadata lock before the data lock Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:26 ` [PATCH v9 04/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Evaluate scsi_debug_lbp() only once Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:26 ` [PATCH v9 05/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Report the residual of a write Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:40   ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-27  7:01     ` Niklas Cassel
2026-09-28  6:45   ` Damien Le Moal
2026-09-28  7:15     ` Niklas Cassel [this message]
2026-09-28  7:51       ` Damien Le Moal
2026-09-28  8:15         ` Damien Le Moal
2026-09-27  5:26 ` [PATCH v9 06/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Enforce physical block alignment of zoned writes Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:26 ` [PATCH v9 07/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Do not write a partial physical block to a zoned device Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:26 ` [PATCH v9 08/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Advance the write pointer over the data written Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:27 ` [PATCH v9 09/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Refuse a short WRITE ATOMIC (16) before writing it Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:27 ` [PATCH v9 10/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Map the region written by WRITE ATOMIC (16) Niklas Cassel
2026-09-27  5:27 ` [PATCH v9 11/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Validate the access parameters of " Niklas Cassel

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=aroT_W6PzdiUeUBd@ryzen \
    --to=cassel@kernel.org \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=john.garry@linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mkp@kernel.org \
    /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.