Linux ATA/IDE development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
To: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
Cc: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ata: libata-scsi: terminate deferred commands on time out
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 17:29:56 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43c999f5-84bd-45f1-8194-cc80a535ef0a@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alCoB5FOGJTljbjU@fedora>

On 7/10/26 17:06, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 04:25:38PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>>> [Severity: High]
>>> Does this function need to set ATA_PFLAG_EH_PENDING?
>>>
>>> Because this flag is not set, ata_port_eh_scheduled() will evaluate to
>>> false. This allows the block layer to immediately retry the requeued
>>> commands, which __ata_scsi_queuecmd() will accept and re-defer, keeping
>>> the host busy.
>>
>> No it will not because this is called with SCSI EH already waiting to run, so
>> newly incoming commands are not passed down by the scsi layer.
> 
> Could you please point to specific functions + lines in the code?
> 
> AFAICT, I don't see how SCSI EH is waiting to run when
> scsi_eh_scmd_add() has not yet been called.

The wait is at the beginning of the EH task:

int scsi_error_handler(void *data)
{
...
              if ((shost->host_failed == 0 && shost->host_eh_scheduled == 0) ||
                  shost->host_failed != scsi_host_busy(shost)) {
                        SCSI_LOG_ERROR_RECOVERY(1,
                                shost_printk(KERN_INFO, shost,
                                             "scsi_eh_%d: sleeping\n",
                                             shost->host_no));
                        schedule();
                        continue;
                }

and... looking at the code from there, indeed, scsi_timeout() calls eventually
scsi_eh_scmd_add() which increases host_failed. So looks like Sashiko has a
point here, and we could see the requeued deferred QCs immediately re-issued,
which would keep scsi_host_busy() incremented.

Grrr... Need to dig further.
> 
> Note that all the places that currently call ata_scsi_requeue_deferred_qc()
> are called when ATA_PFLAG_EH_PENDING | ATA_PFLAG_EH_IN_PROGRESS
> (ata_port_eh_scheduled() evaluates to true).
> 
> We could add an WARN_ON(!ata_port_eh_scheduled) in ata_scsi_requeue_deferred_qc()
> and we would never see the warning.

You will see the WARN for a timeout because in that case, we enter EH from an
expired block layer timeout calling scsi_timeout(), not from an error IRQ
signaled by the ATA controller. So we do not have ATA_PFLAG_EH_PENDING set.

> With the new function ata_scsi_port_eh_timed_out(), AFAICT, it can call
> ata_scsi_requeue_deferred_qc() before ata_port_eh_scheduled() evaluates to true.

Yes.

> See e.g. the commit message for:
> e20e81a24a4d ("ata: libata-core: do not issue non-internal commands once EH is pending")
> of why I think __ata_scsi_queuecmd() will accept new commands.

Yes, it seems that nothing blocks new commands until scsi_eh_scmd_add() as that
is the function setting the host state to recovery.

So back to the drawing board. A simple requeue will not cut it.

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-10  8:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-10  0:06 [PATCH v2 0/2] fixup handling of timeouts with deferred QCs Damien Le Moal
2026-07-10  0:06 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ata: libata-scsi: terminate deferred commands on time out Damien Le Moal
2026-07-10  0:24   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-10  7:25     ` Damien Le Moal
2026-07-10  8:06       ` Niklas Cassel
2026-07-10  8:29         ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2026-07-10  8:48           ` Niklas Cassel
2026-07-10  8:39     ` Niklas Cassel
2026-07-10  7:32   ` Niklas Cassel
2026-07-10  0:06 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] scsi: libsas: " Damien Le Moal
2026-07-10  1:53   ` Jason Yan

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=43c999f5-84bd-45f1-8194-cc80a535ef0a@kernel.org \
    --to=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=cassel@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox