Re: [PATCH 11/11] xfs: add media error reporting ioctl

["Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>]

On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 05:20:32PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 08:18:17AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > All the partition mapping can be trivially undone.  I still think
> > > issuing the commands on the block device instead of from the file
> > > system feels wrong.
> > 
> > "From the filesystem"?  That gives me an idea: what if xfs_scrub instead
> > opens the root dir, calls an ioctl that does the verify work, and that
> > ioctl then reports the result to userspace and xfs_healthmon?
> > 
> > As opposed to this kind of stupid reporting ioctl?
> 
> Yes, that's what I've been trying to push for.  I guess I didn't really
> express that clearly enough.

Aha, ok.  I'm glad I finally caught up; I'll take a look at this today.

> > > > simply does direct reads to a throwaway page, to work around willy's
> > > > objection that the existing scsi verify command doesn't require proof
> > > > that the device actually did anything (and some of them clearly don't).
> > > 
> > > We could do that, although I'd make it conditional.  For the kind of
> > > storage you want to store your data on it does work, as the customer
> > > would get very unhappy otherwise.
> > 
> > Heheh.  It's really too bad that I have a bunch of Very Expensive RAID
> > controllers that lie... and it's the crappy Samsung QVO SSDs that
> > actually do the work.
> 
> Well, we can have versions of the ioctls that do verify vs a real read..

<nod> seeing as there's no block layer function for verify anyway, I'll
have to start with submit_bio to a dummy page anyway.

--D