[PATCH v5 0/7] Improve libata support for FUA

[PATCH v5 0/7] Improve libata support for FUA

[Damien Le Moal]

These patches cleanup and improve libata support for ATA devices
supporting the FUA feature.

The first patch modifies the block layer to prevent the use of REQ_FUA
with read requests. This is necessary as the block layer code expect
REQ_FUA to be used with write requests (the flush machinery cannot
enforce access to the media for FUA read commands) and FUA is not
supported with ATA devices when NCQ is not enabled (device queue depth
set to 1).

Patch 2 and 3 are libata cleanup preparatory patches. Patch 4 cleans up
the detection for FUA support. Patch 5 fixes building a taskfile for FUA
write requests. Patch 6 prevents the use of FUA with known bad drives.

Finally, patch 7 enables FUA support by default in libata for devices
supporting this features.

Changes from v4:
 - Changed patch 1 to the one suggested by Christoph.
 - Added Hannes review tag.

Changes from v3:
 - Added patch 1 to prevent any block device user from issuing a
   REQ_FUA read.
 - Changed patch 5 to remove the check for REQ_FUA read and also remove 
   support for ATA_CMD_WRITE_MULTI_FUA_EXT as this command is obsolete
   in recent ACS specifications.

Changes from v2:
 - Added patch 1 and 2 as preparatory patches
 - Added patch 4 to fix FUA writes handling for the non-ncq case. Note
   that it is possible that the drives blacklisted in patch 5 are
   actually OK since the code back in 2012 had the issue with the wrong
   use of LBA 28 commands for FUA writes.

Changes from v1:
 - Removed Maciej's patch 2. Instead, blacklist drives which are known
   to have a buggy FUA support.

Christoph Hellwig (1):
  block: add a sanity check for non-write flush/fua bios

Damien Le Moal (6):
  ata: libata: Introduce ata_ncq_supported()
  ata: libata: Rename and cleanup ata_rwcmd_protocol()
  ata: libata: cleanup fua support detection
  ata: libata: Fix FUA handling in ata_build_rw_tf()
  ata: libata: blacklist FUA support for known buggy drives
  ata: libata: Enable fua support by default

 .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt         |  3 +
 block/blk-core.c                              | 13 ++--
 drivers/ata/libata-core.c                     | 77 ++++++++++++++-----
 drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c                     | 30 +-------
 include/linux/libata.h                        | 34 +++++---
 5 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)

-- 
2.38.1

[PATCH v5 1/7] block: add a sanity check for non-write flush/fua bios

[Damien Le Moal]

From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Check that the PREFUSH and FUA flags are only set on write bios,
given that the flush state machine expects that.

Reported-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
---
 block/blk-core.c | 13 ++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index 17667159482e..d3446d38ba77 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -730,12 +730,15 @@ void submit_bio_noacct(struct bio *bio)
 	 * Filter flush bio's early so that bio based drivers without flush
 	 * support don't have to worry about them.
 	 */
-	if (op_is_flush(bio->bi_opf) &&
-	    !test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_WC, &q->queue_flags)) {
-		bio->bi_opf &= ~(REQ_PREFLUSH | REQ_FUA);
-		if (!bio_sectors(bio)) {
-			status = BLK_STS_OK;
+	if (op_is_flush(bio->bi_opf)) {
+		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(bio_op(bio) != REQ_OP_WRITE))
 			goto end_io;
+		if (!test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_WC, &q->queue_flags)) {
+			bio->bi_opf &= ~(REQ_PREFLUSH | REQ_FUA);
+			if (!bio_sectors(bio)) {
+				status = BLK_STS_OK;
+				goto end_io;
+			}
 		}
 	}
 
-- 
2.38.1

[PATCH v5 2/7] ata: libata: Introduce ata_ncq_supported()

[Damien Le Moal]

Introduce the inline helper function ata_ncq_supported() to test if a
device supports NCQ commands. The function ata_ncq_enabled() is also
rewritten using this new helper function.

Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
---
 include/linux/libata.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/libata.h b/include/linux/libata.h
index af4953b95f76..58651f565b36 100644
--- a/include/linux/libata.h
+++ b/include/linux/libata.h
@@ -1690,21 +1690,35 @@ extern struct ata_device *ata_dev_next(struct ata_device *dev,
 	     (dev) = ata_dev_next((dev), (link), ATA_DITER_##mode))
 
 /**
- *	ata_ncq_enabled - Test whether NCQ is enabled
- *	@dev: ATA device to test for
+ *	ata_ncq_supported - Test whether NCQ is supported
+ *	@dev: ATA device to test
  *
  *	LOCKING:
  *	spin_lock_irqsave(host lock)
  *
  *	RETURNS:
- *	1 if NCQ is enabled for @dev, 0 otherwise.
+ *	true if @dev supports NCQ, false otherwise.
  */
-static inline int ata_ncq_enabled(struct ata_device *dev)
+static inline bool ata_ncq_supported(struct ata_device *dev)
 {
 	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SATA_HOST))
 		return 0;
-	return (dev->flags & (ATA_DFLAG_PIO | ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_OFF |
-			      ATA_DFLAG_NCQ)) == ATA_DFLAG_NCQ;
+	return (dev->flags & (ATA_DFLAG_PIO | ATA_DFLAG_NCQ)) == ATA_DFLAG_NCQ;
+}
+
+/**
+ *	ata_ncq_enabled - Test whether NCQ is enabled
+ *	@dev: ATA device to test
+ *
+ *	LOCKING:
+ *	spin_lock_irqsave(host lock)
+ *
+ *	RETURNS:
+ *	true if NCQ is enabled for @dev, false otherwise.
+ */
+static inline bool ata_ncq_enabled(struct ata_device *dev)
+{
+	return ata_ncq_supported(dev) && !(dev->flags & ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_OFF);
 }
 
 static inline bool ata_fpdma_dsm_supported(struct ata_device *dev)
-- 
2.38.1

[PATCH v5 3/7] ata: libata: Rename and cleanup ata_rwcmd_protocol()

[Damien Le Moal]

Rename ata_rwcmd_protocol() to ata_set_rwcmd_protocol() to better
reflect the fact that this function sets a task file command and
protocol. The arguments order is also reversed and the function return
type changed to a bool to indicate if the command and protocol were set
corretly (instead of returning a completely arbitrary "-1" value.

Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
---
 drivers/ata/libata-core.c | 28 +++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
index 884ae73b11ea..6ee1cbac3ab0 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
@@ -574,17 +574,18 @@ static const u8 ata_rw_cmds[] = {
 };
 
 /**
- *	ata_rwcmd_protocol - set taskfile r/w commands and protocol
- *	@tf: command to examine and configure
- *	@dev: device tf belongs to
+ *	ata_set_rwcmd_protocol - set taskfile r/w command and protocol
+ *	@dev: target device for the taskfile
+ *	@tf: taskfile to examine and configure
  *
- *	Examine the device configuration and tf->flags to calculate
- *	the proper read/write commands and protocol to use.
+ *	Examine the device configuration and tf->flags to determine
+ *	the proper read/write command and protocol to use for @tf.
  *
  *	LOCKING:
  *	caller.
  */
-static int ata_rwcmd_protocol(struct ata_taskfile *tf, struct ata_device *dev)
+static bool ata_set_rwcmd_protocol(struct ata_device *dev,
+				   struct ata_taskfile *tf)
 {
 	u8 cmd;
 
@@ -607,11 +608,12 @@ static int ata_rwcmd_protocol(struct ata_taskfile *tf, struct ata_device *dev)
 	}
 
 	cmd = ata_rw_cmds[index + fua + lba48 + write];
-	if (cmd) {
-		tf->command = cmd;
-		return 0;
-	}
-	return -1;
+	if (!cmd)
+		return false;
+
+	tf->command = cmd;
+
+	return true;
 }
 
 /**
@@ -744,7 +746,7 @@ int ata_build_rw_tf(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc, u64 block, u32 n_block,
 			/* request too large even for LBA48 */
 			return -ERANGE;
 
-		if (unlikely(ata_rwcmd_protocol(tf, dev) < 0))
+		if (unlikely(!ata_set_rwcmd_protocol(dev, tf)))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
 		tf->nsect = n_block & 0xff;
@@ -762,7 +764,7 @@ int ata_build_rw_tf(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc, u64 block, u32 n_block,
 		if (!lba_28_ok(block, n_block))
 			return -ERANGE;
 
-		if (unlikely(ata_rwcmd_protocol(tf, dev) < 0))
+		if (unlikely(!ata_set_rwcmd_protocol(dev, tf)))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
 		/* Convert LBA to CHS */
-- 
2.38.1

[PATCH v5 4/7] ata: libata: cleanup fua support detection

[Damien Le Moal]

Move the detection of a device FUA support from
ata_scsiop_mode_sense()/ata_dev_supports_fua() to device scan time in
ata_dev_configure().

The function ata_dev_config_fua() is introduced to detect if a device
supports FUA and this support is indicated using the new device flag
ATA_DFLAG_FUA.

In order to blacklist known buggy devices, the horkage flag
ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA is introduced. Similarly to other horkage flags, the
libata.force= arguments "fua" and "nofua" are also introduced to allow
a user to control this horkage flag through the "force" libata
module parameter.

The ATA_DFLAG_FUA device flag is set only and only if all the following
conditions are met:
* libata.fua module parameter is set to 1
* The device supports the WRITE DMA FUA EXT command,
* The device is not marked with the ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA flag, either from
  the blacklist or set by the user with libata.force=nofua
* The device supports NCQ (while this is not mandated by the standards,
  this restriction is introduced to avoid problems with older non-NCQ
  devices).

Enabling or diabling libata FUA support for all devices can now also be
done using the "force=[no]fua" module parameter when libata.fua is set
to 1.

Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
---
 .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt         |  3 ++
 drivers/ata/libata-core.c                     | 30 ++++++++++++++++++-
 drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c                     | 30 ++-----------------
 include/linux/libata.h                        |  8 +++--
 4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
index a465d5242774..f9724642c703 100644
--- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
+++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
@@ -2786,6 +2786,9 @@
 			* [no]setxfer: Indicate if transfer speed mode setting
 			  should be skipped.
 
+			* [no]fua: Disable or enable FUA (Force Unit Access)
+			  support for devices supporting this feature.
+
 			* dump_id: Dump IDENTIFY data.
 
 			* disable: Disable this device.
diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
index 6ee1cbac3ab0..30adae16efff 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
@@ -2422,6 +2422,28 @@ static void ata_dev_config_chs(struct ata_device *dev)
 			     dev->heads, dev->sectors);
 }
 
+static void ata_dev_config_fua(struct ata_device *dev)
+{
+	/* Ignore FUA support if its use is disabled globally */
+	if (!libata_fua)
+		goto nofua;
+
+	/* Ignore devices without support for WRITE DMA FUA EXT */
+	if (!(dev->flags & ATA_DFLAG_LBA48) || !ata_id_has_fua(dev->id))
+		goto nofua;
+
+	/* Ignore known bad devices and devices that lack NCQ support */
+	if (!ata_ncq_supported(dev) || (dev->horkage & ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA))
+		goto nofua;
+
+	dev->flags |= ATA_DFLAG_FUA;
+
+	return;
+
+nofua:
+	dev->flags &= ~ATA_DFLAG_FUA;
+}
+
 static void ata_dev_config_devslp(struct ata_device *dev)
 {
 	u8 *sata_setting = dev->link->ap->sector_buf;
@@ -2510,7 +2532,8 @@ static void ata_dev_print_features(struct ata_device *dev)
 		return;
 
 	ata_dev_info(dev,
-		     "Features:%s%s%s%s%s%s\n",
+		     "Features:%s%s%s%s%s%s%s\n",
+		     dev->flags & ATA_DFLAG_FUA ? " FUA" : "",
 		     dev->flags & ATA_DFLAG_TRUSTED ? " Trust" : "",
 		     dev->flags & ATA_DFLAG_DA ? " Dev-Attention" : "",
 		     dev->flags & ATA_DFLAG_DEVSLP ? " Dev-Sleep" : "",
@@ -2671,6 +2694,7 @@ int ata_dev_configure(struct ata_device *dev)
 			ata_dev_config_chs(dev);
 		}
 
+		ata_dev_config_fua(dev);
 		ata_dev_config_devslp(dev);
 		ata_dev_config_sense_reporting(dev);
 		ata_dev_config_zac(dev);
@@ -4105,6 +4129,9 @@ static const struct ata_blacklist_entry ata_device_blacklist [] = {
 	 */
 	{ "SATADOM-ML 3ME",		NULL,	ATA_HORKAGE_NO_LOG_DIR },
 
+	/* Buggy FUA */
+	{ "Maxtor",		"BANC1G10",	ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA },
+
 	/* End Marker */
 	{ }
 };
@@ -6216,6 +6243,7 @@ static const struct ata_force_param force_tbl[] __initconst = {
 	force_horkage_onoff(lpm,	ATA_HORKAGE_NOLPM),
 	force_horkage_onoff(setxfer,	ATA_HORKAGE_NOSETXFER),
 	force_horkage_on(dump_id,	ATA_HORKAGE_DUMP_ID),
+	force_horkage_onoff(fua,	ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA),
 
 	force_horkage_on(disable,	ATA_HORKAGE_DISABLE),
 };
diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
index 4cb914103382..69948e2a8f6d 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
@@ -2240,30 +2240,6 @@ static unsigned int ata_msense_rw_recovery(u8 *buf, bool changeable)
 	return sizeof(def_rw_recovery_mpage);
 }
 
-/*
- * We can turn this into a real blacklist if it's needed, for now just
- * blacklist any Maxtor BANC1G10 revision firmware
- */
-static int ata_dev_supports_fua(u16 *id)
-{
-	unsigned char model[ATA_ID_PROD_LEN + 1], fw[ATA_ID_FW_REV_LEN + 1];
-
-	if (!libata_fua)
-		return 0;
-	if (!ata_id_has_fua(id))
-		return 0;
-
-	ata_id_c_string(id, model, ATA_ID_PROD, sizeof(model));
-	ata_id_c_string(id, fw, ATA_ID_FW_REV, sizeof(fw));
-
-	if (strcmp(model, "Maxtor"))
-		return 1;
-	if (strcmp(fw, "BANC1G10"))
-		return 1;
-
-	return 0; /* blacklisted */
-}
-
 /**
  *	ata_scsiop_mode_sense - Simulate MODE SENSE 6, 10 commands
  *	@args: device IDENTIFY data / SCSI command of interest.
@@ -2287,7 +2263,7 @@ static unsigned int ata_scsiop_mode_sense(struct ata_scsi_args *args, u8 *rbuf)
 	};
 	u8 pg, spg;
 	unsigned int ebd, page_control, six_byte;
-	u8 dpofua, bp = 0xff;
+	u8 dpofua = 0, bp = 0xff;
 	u16 fp;
 
 	six_byte = (scsicmd[0] == MODE_SENSE);
@@ -2350,9 +2326,7 @@ static unsigned int ata_scsiop_mode_sense(struct ata_scsi_args *args, u8 *rbuf)
 		goto invalid_fld;
 	}
 
-	dpofua = 0;
-	if (ata_dev_supports_fua(args->id) && (dev->flags & ATA_DFLAG_LBA48) &&
-	    (!(dev->flags & ATA_DFLAG_PIO) || dev->multi_count))
+	if (dev->flags & ATA_DFLAG_FUA)
 		dpofua = 1 << 4;
 
 	if (six_byte) {
diff --git a/include/linux/libata.h b/include/linux/libata.h
index 58651f565b36..d30c1288504d 100644
--- a/include/linux/libata.h
+++ b/include/linux/libata.h
@@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ enum {
 	ATA_DFLAG_AN		= (1 << 7), /* AN configured */
 	ATA_DFLAG_TRUSTED	= (1 << 8), /* device supports trusted send/recv */
 	ATA_DFLAG_DMADIR	= (1 << 10), /* device requires DMADIR */
+	ATA_DFLAG_FUA		= (1 << 11), /* device supports FUA */
 	ATA_DFLAG_CFG_MASK	= (1 << 12) - 1,
 
 	ATA_DFLAG_PIO		= (1 << 12), /* device limited to PIO mode */
@@ -113,9 +114,9 @@ enum {
 	ATA_DFLAG_D_SENSE	= (1 << 29), /* Descriptor sense requested */
 	ATA_DFLAG_ZAC		= (1 << 30), /* ZAC device */
 
-	ATA_DFLAG_FEATURES_MASK	= ATA_DFLAG_TRUSTED | ATA_DFLAG_DA | \
-				  ATA_DFLAG_DEVSLP | ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_SEND_RECV | \
-				  ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_PRIO,
+	ATA_DFLAG_FEATURES_MASK	= (ATA_DFLAG_TRUSTED | ATA_DFLAG_DA |	\
+				   ATA_DFLAG_DEVSLP | ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_SEND_RECV | \
+				   ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_PRIO | ATA_DFLAG_FUA),
 
 	ATA_DEV_UNKNOWN		= 0,	/* unknown device */
 	ATA_DEV_ATA		= 1,	/* ATA device */
@@ -381,6 +382,7 @@ enum {
 	ATA_HORKAGE_NO_NCQ_ON_ATI = (1 << 27),	/* Disable NCQ on ATI chipset */
 	ATA_HORKAGE_NO_ID_DEV_LOG = (1 << 28),	/* Identify device log missing */
 	ATA_HORKAGE_NO_LOG_DIR	= (1 << 29),	/* Do not read log directory */
+	ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA	= (1 << 30),	/* Do not use FUA */
 
 	 /* DMA mask for user DMA control: User visible values; DO NOT
 	    renumber */
-- 
2.38.1

[PATCH v5 5/7] ata: libata: Fix FUA handling in ata_build_rw_tf()

[Damien Le Moal]

If a user issues a write command with the FUA bit set for a device with
NCQ support disabled (that is, the device queue depth was set to 1), the
LBA 48 command WRITE DMA FUA EXT must be used. However,
ata_build_rw_tf() ignores this and first tests if LBA 28 can be used
based on the write command sector and number of blocks. That is, for
small FUA writes at low LBAs, ata_rwcmd_protocol() will cause the write
to fail.

Fix this by preventing the use of LBA 28 for any FUA write request.

Given that the WRITE MULTI FUA EXT command is marked as obsolete iin the
ATA specification since ACS-3 (published in 2013), remove the
ATA_CMD_WRITE_MULTI_FUA_EXT command from the ata_rw_cmds array.

Finally, since the block layer should never issue a FUA read
request, warn in ata_build_rw_tf() if we see such request.

Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
---
 drivers/ata/libata-core.c | 12 +++++++++---
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
index 30adae16efff..83bea8591b08 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
@@ -552,7 +552,7 @@ static const u8 ata_rw_cmds[] = {
 	0,
 	0,
 	0,
-	ATA_CMD_WRITE_MULTI_FUA_EXT,
+	0,
 	/* pio */
 	ATA_CMD_PIO_READ,
 	ATA_CMD_PIO_WRITE,
@@ -693,6 +693,10 @@ int ata_build_rw_tf(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc, u64 block, u32 n_block,
 	tf->flags |= ATA_TFLAG_ISADDR | ATA_TFLAG_DEVICE;
 	tf->flags |= tf_flags;
 
+	/* We should never get a FUA read */
+	WARN_ON_ONCE((tf->flags & ATA_TFLAG_FUA) &&
+		     !(tf->flags & ATA_TFLAG_WRITE));
+
 	if (ata_ncq_enabled(dev)) {
 		/* yay, NCQ */
 		if (!lba_48_ok(block, n_block))
@@ -727,7 +731,8 @@ int ata_build_rw_tf(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc, u64 block, u32 n_block,
 	} else if (dev->flags & ATA_DFLAG_LBA) {
 		tf->flags |= ATA_TFLAG_LBA;
 
-		if (lba_28_ok(block, n_block)) {
+		/* We need LBA48 for FUA writes */
+		if (!(tf->flags & ATA_TFLAG_FUA) && lba_28_ok(block, n_block)) {
 			/* use LBA28 */
 			tf->device |= (block >> 24) & 0xf;
 		} else if (lba_48_ok(block, n_block)) {
@@ -742,9 +747,10 @@ int ata_build_rw_tf(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc, u64 block, u32 n_block,
 			tf->hob_lbah = (block >> 40) & 0xff;
 			tf->hob_lbam = (block >> 32) & 0xff;
 			tf->hob_lbal = (block >> 24) & 0xff;
-		} else
+		} else {
 			/* request too large even for LBA48 */
 			return -ERANGE;
+		}
 
 		if (unlikely(!ata_set_rwcmd_protocol(dev, tf)))
 			return -EINVAL;
-- 
2.38.1

[PATCH v5 6/7] ata: libata: blacklist FUA support for known buggy drives

[Damien Le Moal]

Thread [1] reported back in 2012 problems with enabling FUA for 3
different drives. Add these drives to ata_device_blacklist[] to mark
them with the ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA flag. To be conservative and avoid
problems on old systems, the model number for the three new entries
are defined as to widely match all drives in the same product line.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+6av4=uxu_q5U_46HtpUt=FSgbh3pZuAEY54J5_xK=MKWq-YQ@mail.gmail.com/

Suggested-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com>
---
 drivers/ata/libata-core.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
index 83bea8591b08..29042665c550 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
@@ -4137,6 +4137,9 @@ static const struct ata_blacklist_entry ata_device_blacklist [] = {
 
 	/* Buggy FUA */
 	{ "Maxtor",		"BANC1G10",	ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA },
+	{ "WDC*WD2500J*",	NULL,		ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA },
+	{ "OCZ-VERTEX*",	NULL,		ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA },
+	{ "INTEL*SSDSC2CT*",	NULL,		ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA },
 
 	/* End Marker */
 	{ }
-- 
2.38.1

[PATCH v5 7/7] ata: libata: Enable fua support by default

[Damien Le Moal]

Change the default value of the fua module parameter to 1 to enable fua
support by default for all devices supporting it.

FUA support can be disabled for individual drives using the
force=[ID]nofua libata module argument.

Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com>
---
 drivers/ata/libata-core.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
index 29042665c550..9e9ce1905992 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
@@ -127,9 +127,9 @@ int atapi_passthru16 = 1;
 module_param(atapi_passthru16, int, 0444);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(atapi_passthru16, "Enable ATA_16 passthru for ATAPI devices (0=off, 1=on [default])");
 
-int libata_fua = 0;
+int libata_fua = 1;
 module_param_named(fua, libata_fua, int, 0444);
-MODULE_PARM_DESC(fua, "FUA support (0=off [default], 1=on)");
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(fua, "FUA support (0=off, 1=on [default])");
 
 static int ata_ignore_hpa;
 module_param_named(ignore_hpa, ata_ignore_hpa, int, 0644);
-- 
2.38.1

Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] block: add a sanity check for non-write flush/fua bios

[Chaitanya Kulkarni]

On 11/6/2022 4:50 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> 
> Check that the PREFUSH and FUA flags are only set on write bios,
> given that the flush state machine expects that.
> 
> Reported-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>

-ck

Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] ata: libata: Introduce ata_ncq_supported()

[Chaitanya Kulkarni]

On 11/6/2022 4:50 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> Introduce the inline helper function ata_ncq_supported() to test if a
> device supports NCQ commands. The function ata_ncq_enabled() is also
> rewritten using this new helper function.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>

-ck

Re: [PATCH v5 3/7] ata: libata: Rename and cleanup ata_rwcmd_protocol()

[Chaitanya Kulkarni]

On 11/6/2022 4:50 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> Rename ata_rwcmd_protocol() to ata_set_rwcmd_protocol() to better
> reflect the fact that this function sets a task file command and
> protocol. The arguments order is also reversed and the function return
> type changed to a bool to indicate if the command and protocol were set
> corretly (instead of returning a completely arbitrary "-1" value.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>


This definitely makes than -1..

Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>

-ck

Re: [PATCH v5 4/7] ata: libata: cleanup fua support detection

[Chaitanya Kulkarni]

On 11/6/2022 4:50 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> Move the detection of a device FUA support from
> ata_scsiop_mode_sense()/ata_dev_supports_fua() to device scan time in
> ata_dev_configure().
> 
> The function ata_dev_config_fua() is introduced to detect if a device
> supports FUA and this support is indicated using the new device flag
> ATA_DFLAG_FUA.
> 
> In order to blacklist known buggy devices, the horkage flag
> ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA is introduced. Similarly to other horkage flags, the
> libata.force= arguments "fua" and "nofua" are also introduced to allow
> a user to control this horkage flag through the "force" libata
> module parameter.
> 
> The ATA_DFLAG_FUA device flag is set only and only if all the following
> conditions are met:
> * libata.fua module parameter is set to 1
> * The device supports the WRITE DMA FUA EXT command,
> * The device is not marked with the ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA flag, either from
>    the blacklist or set by the user with libata.force=nofua
> * The device supports NCQ (while this is not mandated by the standards,
>    this restriction is introduced to avoid problems with older non-NCQ
>    devices).
> 
> Enabling or diabling libata FUA support for all devices can now also be
> done using the "force=[no]fua" module parameter when libata.fua is set
> to 1.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
> ---


Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>

-ck

Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] ata: libata: Fix FUA handling in ata_build_rw_tf()

[Chaitanya Kulkarni]

On 11/6/2022 4:50 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> If a user issues a write command with the FUA bit set for a device with
> NCQ support disabled (that is, the device queue depth was set to 1), the
> LBA 48 command WRITE DMA FUA EXT must be used. However,
> ata_build_rw_tf() ignores this and first tests if LBA 28 can be used
> based on the write command sector and number of blocks. That is, for
> small FUA writes at low LBAs, ata_rwcmd_protocol() will cause the write
> to fail.
> 
> Fix this by preventing the use of LBA 28 for any FUA write request.
> 
> Given that the WRITE MULTI FUA EXT command is marked as obsolete iin the
> ATA specification since ACS-3 (published in 2013), remove the
> ATA_CMD_WRITE_MULTI_FUA_EXT command from the ata_rw_cmds array.
> 
> Finally, since the block layer should never issue a FUA read
> request, warn in ata_build_rw_tf() if we see such request.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
> ---


Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>

-ck

Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] ata: libata: blacklist FUA support for known buggy drives

[Chaitanya Kulkarni]

On 11/6/2022 4:50 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> Thread [1] reported back in 2012 problems with enabling FUA for 3
> different drives. Add these drives to ata_device_blacklist[] to mark
> them with the ATA_HORKAGE_NO_FUA flag. To be conservative and avoid
> problems on old systems, the model number for the three new entries
> are defined as to widely match all drives in the same product line.
> 
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+6av4=uxu_q5U_46HtpUt=FSgbh3pZuAEY54J5_xK=MKWq-YQ@mail.gmail.com/
> 
> Suggested-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
> Reviewed-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com>
> ---



Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>

-ck

Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] ata: libata: Introduce ata_ncq_supported()

[Christoph Hellwig]

Looks good:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Re: [PATCH v5 3/7] ata: libata: Rename and cleanup ata_rwcmd_protocol()

[Christoph Hellwig]

Looks good:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Re: [PATCH v5 7/7] ata: libata: Enable fua support by default

[Chaitanya Kulkarni]

On 11/6/2022 4:50 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> Change the default value of the fua module parameter to 1 to enable fua
> support by default for all devices supporting it.
> 
> FUA support can be disabled for individual drives using the
> force=[ID]nofua libata module argument.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
> Reviewed-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com>
> ---
>   drivers/ata/libata-core.c | 4 ++--
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
> index 29042665c550..9e9ce1905992 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
> @@ -127,9 +127,9 @@ int atapi_passthru16 = 1;
>   module_param(atapi_passthru16, int, 0444);
>   MODULE_PARM_DESC(atapi_passthru16, "Enable ATA_16 passthru for ATAPI devices (0=off, 1=on [default])");
>   
> -int libata_fua = 0;
> +int libata_fua = 1;
>   module_param_named(fua, libata_fua, int, 0444);
> -MODULE_PARM_DESC(fua, "FUA support (0=off [default], 1=on)");
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(fua, "FUA support (0=off, 1=on [default])");
>   

perhaps its time to make it bool ? maybe there is a reason I don't
know why it is int ...

no biggie, either way ...

Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>

-ck

Re: [PATCH v5 4/7] ata: libata: cleanup fua support detection

[Christoph Hellwig]

Looks good:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] ata: libata: Fix FUA handling in ata_build_rw_tf()

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:50:19AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> Finally, since the block layer should never issue a FUA read
> request, warn in ata_build_rw_tf() if we see such request.

Couldn't this be triggered using SG_IO passthrough with a SCSI 
WRITE* command that has the FUA bit set?

Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] ata: libata: blacklist FUA support for known buggy drives

[Christoph Hellwig]

Looks good:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] block: add a sanity check for non-write flush/fua bios

[Hannes Reinecke]

On 11/7/22 01:50, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> 
> Check that the PREFUSH and FUA flags are only set on write bios,
> given that the flush state machine expects that.
> 
> Reported-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> ---
>   block/blk-core.c | 13 ++++++++-----
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke		           Kernel Storage Architect
hare@suse.de			                  +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: Felix Imendörffer

Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] ata: libata: Fix FUA handling in ata_build_rw_tf()

[Damien Le Moal]

On 11/7/22 14:50, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:50:19AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> Finally, since the block layer should never issue a FUA read
>> request, warn in ata_build_rw_tf() if we see such request.
> 
> Couldn't this be triggered using SG_IO passthrough with a SCSI 
> WRITE* command that has the FUA bit set?

Yes indeed. Should I drop the warn ?

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] ata: libata: Fix FUA handling in ata_build_rw_tf()

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:12:57PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 11/7/22 14:50, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:50:19AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> >> Finally, since the block layer should never issue a FUA read
> >> request, warn in ata_build_rw_tf() if we see such request.
> > 
> > Couldn't this be triggered using SG_IO passthrough with a SCSI 
> > WRITE* command that has the FUA bit set?
> 
> Yes indeed. Should I drop the warn ?

I think the warn needs to go.  But don't we also need to handle the
non-NCQ fua case if we don't want to break pure passthrough appliations?
Or do we simply not care?  In the latter case we'll at least need a
comment documenting that tradeoff.

Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] ata: libata: Fix FUA handling in ata_build_rw_tf()

[Damien Le Moal]

On 11/7/22 21:16, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:12:57PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 11/7/22 14:50, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:50:19AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>>>> Finally, since the block layer should never issue a FUA read
>>>> request, warn in ata_build_rw_tf() if we see such request.
>>>
>>> Couldn't this be triggered using SG_IO passthrough with a SCSI 
>>> WRITE* command that has the FUA bit set?
>>
>> Yes indeed. Should I drop the warn ?
> 
> I think the warn needs to go.  But don't we also need to handle the
> non-NCQ fua case if we don't want to break pure passthrough appliations?
> Or do we simply not care?  In the latter case we'll at least need a
> comment documenting that tradeoff.

I am tempted to say "not care" since it has been like this since forever,
silently letting FUA read through that do not do FUA at all...

I am also tempted to say "let's add a check and fail those FUA reads that
are not supported", that is, essentially stop hiding errors to the user.
Bad passthrough applications that were working would stop working. Is that
considered breaking the app if it was bad in the first place ?

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] ata: libata: Fix FUA handling in ata_build_rw_tf()

[Damien Le Moal]

On 11/7/22 21:16, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:12:57PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 11/7/22 14:50, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:50:19AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>>>> Finally, since the block layer should never issue a FUA read
>>>> request, warn in ata_build_rw_tf() if we see such request.
>>>
>>> Couldn't this be triggered using SG_IO passthrough with a SCSI 
>>> WRITE* command that has the FUA bit set?
>>
>> Yes indeed. Should I drop the warn ?
> 
> I think the warn needs to go.  But don't we also need to handle the
> non-NCQ fua case if we don't want to break pure passthrough appliations?
> Or do we simply not care?  In the latter case we'll at least need a
> comment documenting that tradeoff.

Actually, this was already handled: for an FUA read without ncq enabed,
ata_set_rwcmd_protocol() will return false, leading to ata_build_rw_tf()
to return EINVAL, which is then translated to ILLEGAL REQUEST/INVALID
FIELD IN CDB in libata-scsi. So passthrough applications attempting FUA
reads without NCQ will see an error, as they already did before (modulo
the bug with lba28, that is, the error was only for reads to higher LBAs
or larger commands).

So no additional checks needed I think.


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research