From: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
To: Igor Pylypiv <ipylypiv@google.com>
Cc: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>,
John Garry <john.garry@linux.dev>,
Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: libata-sata: allow re-enabling NCQ with the same queue_depth
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2026 22:03:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <auO0lmGIi0AZUH40@ryzen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261029184445.1615717-1-ipylypiv@google.com>
On Thu, Oct 29, 2026 at 11:44:45AM -0700, Igor Pylypiv wrote:
> When ata_eh_speed_down() disables NCQ due to excessive errors, it sets
> ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_OFF without changing sdev->queue_depth. Userspace can
> re-enable NCQ by writing a queue depth > 1 to the sysfs queue_depth
> attribute, which invokes ata_change_queue_depth() to clear
> ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_OFF.
>
> However, ata_change_queue_depth() returns early if the requested
> queue_depth is equal to sdev->queue_depth before clearing
> ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_OFF. As a result, writing a different queue depth > 1
> re-enables NCQ, whereas writing the current sdev->queue_depth value
> leaves ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_OFF set.
>
> Since ata_change_queue_depth() already checks whether queue_depth equals
> sdev->queue_depth before calling scsi_change_queue_depth(), remove the
> early check so that writing the current queue_depth > 1 clears
> ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_OFF and re-enables NCQ.
>
> Fixes: 45623d33bfc0 ("ata: libata-sata: Improve ata_change_queue_depth()")
> Signed-off-by: Igor Pylypiv <ipylypiv@google.com>
> ---
> Commit 45623d33bfc0 ("ata: libata-sata: Improve ata_change_queue_depth()")
> didn't add the first queue depth check, but it changed the return value
> of the second check from -EINVAL to sdev->queue_depth so it seemed like
> a better candidate for the Fixes tag.
>
> drivers/ata/libata-sata.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-sata.c b/drivers/ata/libata-sata.c
> index 32fd0e804654..d917242ac136 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-sata.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-sata.c
> @@ -1287,7 +1287,7 @@ int ata_change_queue_depth(struct ata_port *ap, struct scsi_device *sdev,
> spin_lock_irqsave(ap->lock, flags);
>
> dev = ata_scsi_find_dev(ap, sdev);
> - if (!dev || queue_depth < 1 || queue_depth == sdev->queue_depth) {
> + if (!dev || queue_depth < 1) {
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(ap->lock, flags);
> return sdev->queue_depth;
> }
> --
> 2.56.0.317.g454f8302e1-goog
>
You could probably even change you commit message to say:
before 45623d33bfc0 ("ata: libata-sata: Improve ata_change_queue_depth()"),
ata_change_queue_depth() cleared ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_OFF unconditionally:
- dev->flags &= ~ATA_DFLAG_NCQ_OFF;
So the subject of the patch could theoretically be:
ata: libata-sata: re-allow re-enabling NCQ with the same queue_depth
Perhaps that is too many re-..
Anyway, re-gardless:
Reviewed-by: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-29 21:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-29 18:44 [PATCH] ata: libata-sata: allow re-enabling NCQ with the same queue_depth Igor Pylypiv
2026-10-29 21:03 ` Niklas Cassel [this message]
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=auO0lmGIi0AZUH40@ryzen \
--to=cassel@kernel.org \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=ipylypiv@google.com \
--cc=johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com \
--cc=john.garry@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox