* Re: [External] : [PATCH] scsi_error: do not queue pointless abort workqueue functions
2022-11-09 7:47 [PATCH] scsi_error: do not queue pointless abort workqueue functions Hannes Reinecke
@ 2022-11-09 8:28 ` John Garry
2022-11-09 12:48 ` Hannes Reinecke
2022-11-09 9:29 ` Niklas Cassel
2022-11-10 10:38 ` Niklas Cassel
2 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: John Garry @ 2022-11-09 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hannes Reinecke, Martin K. Petersen
Cc: Christoph Hellwig, James Bottomley, linux-scsi, Niklas Cassel,
Damien Le Moal
On 09/11/2022 07:47, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> If a host template doesn't implement the .eh_abort_handler()
> there is no point in queueing the abort workqueue function;
> all it does is invoking SCSI EH anyway.
> So return 'FAILED' from scsi_abort_command() if the .eh_abort_handler()
> is not implemented and save us from having to wait for the
> abort workqueue function to complete.
Do we ever use shost->tmf_work_q in this case? Doesn't seem much point
in allocating it, apart from keeping the code simpler
>
> Cc: Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>
> Cc: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Cc: John Garry <john.garry@oracle.com>
That's someone else :)
> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> index be2a70c5ac6d..e9f9c8f52c59 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> @@ -242,6 +242,11 @@ scsi_abort_command(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd)
> return FAILED;
> }
>
> + if (!shost->hostt->eh_abort_handler) {
nit: no need for {}, but maybe better put comment above the check if
removing it. However maybe it's also a bit obvious comment.
> + /* No abort handler, fail command directly */
> + return FAILED;
> + }
> +
> spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags);
> if (shost->eh_deadline != -1 && !shost->last_reset)
> shost->last_reset = jiffies;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] scsi_error: do not queue pointless abort workqueue functions
2022-11-09 7:47 [PATCH] scsi_error: do not queue pointless abort workqueue functions Hannes Reinecke
2022-11-09 8:28 ` [External] : " John Garry
@ 2022-11-09 9:29 ` Niklas Cassel
2022-11-10 10:38 ` Niklas Cassel
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Niklas Cassel @ 2022-11-09 9:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hannes Reinecke
Cc: Martin K. Petersen, Christoph Hellwig, James Bottomley,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Damien Le Moal, John Garry
On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 08:47:54AM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> If a host template doesn't implement the .eh_abort_handler()
> there is no point in queueing the abort workqueue function;
> all it does is invoking SCSI EH anyway.
> So return 'FAILED' from scsi_abort_command() if the .eh_abort_handler()
> is not implemented and save us from having to wait for the
> abort workqueue function to complete.
>
> Cc: Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>
> Cc: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Cc: John Garry <john.garry@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> index be2a70c5ac6d..e9f9c8f52c59 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> @@ -242,6 +242,11 @@ scsi_abort_command(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd)
> return FAILED;
> }
>
> + if (!shost->hostt->eh_abort_handler) {
> + /* No abort handler, fail command directly */
> + return FAILED;
> + }
> +
> spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags);
> if (shost->eh_deadline != -1 && !shost->last_reset)
> shost->last_reset = jiffies;
> --
> 2.35.3
>
Tested-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@wdc.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] scsi_error: do not queue pointless abort workqueue functions
2022-11-09 7:47 [PATCH] scsi_error: do not queue pointless abort workqueue functions Hannes Reinecke
2022-11-09 8:28 ` [External] : " John Garry
2022-11-09 9:29 ` Niklas Cassel
@ 2022-11-10 10:38 ` Niklas Cassel
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Niklas Cassel @ 2022-11-10 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hannes Reinecke
Cc: Martin K. Petersen, Christoph Hellwig, James Bottomley,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Damien Le Moal, John Garry
On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 08:47:54AM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> If a host template doesn't implement the .eh_abort_handler()
> there is no point in queueing the abort workqueue function;
> all it does is invoking SCSI EH anyway.
> So return 'FAILED' from scsi_abort_command() if the .eh_abort_handler()
> is not implemented and save us from having to wait for the
> abort workqueue function to complete.
>
> Cc: Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>
> Cc: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
> Cc: John Garry <john.garry@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> index be2a70c5ac6d..e9f9c8f52c59 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> @@ -242,6 +242,11 @@ scsi_abort_command(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd)
> return FAILED;
> }
>
> + if (!shost->hostt->eh_abort_handler) {
> + /* No abort handler, fail command directly */
> + return FAILED;
> + }
> +
Hello Hannes,
is there any reason why you didn't put this before the preceding
if (scmd->eh_eflags & SCSI_EH_ABORT_SCHEDULED) {
if statement?
> spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags);
> if (shost->eh_deadline != -1 && !shost->last_reset)
> shost->last_reset = jiffies;
> --
> 2.35.3
>
After some additional testing with this patch, I did notice that it does
introduce a behavioural change from libata perspective:
Before this patch, for libata, scmd_eh_abort_handler() would get called,
and we would come into this statement:
rtn = scsi_try_to_abort_cmd(shost->hostt, scmd);
if (rtn != SUCCESS) {
SCSI_LOG_ERROR_RECOVERY(3,
scmd_printk(KERN_INFO, scmd,
"cmd abort %s\n",
(rtn == FAST_IO_FAIL) ?
"not send" : "failed"));
goto out;
}
Which jumps to:
out:
spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags);
list_del_init(&scmd->eh_entry);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(shost->host_lock, flags);
scsi_eh_scmd_add(scmd);
So scsi_eh_scmd_add() would be called.
After this patch, scsi_abort_command() will return FAILED instead
of SUCCESS, which means that scsi_timeout() instead enters this
if statement:
if (scsi_abort_command(scmd) != SUCCESS) {
set_host_byte(scmd, DID_TIME_OUT);
scsi_eh_scmd_add(scmd);
}
Which means that scmds reaching libata .eh_strategy_handler()
now has host_byte DID_TIME_OUT set, while before this patch,
that was not the case.
I guess we could simply clear the host_byte in libata's
.eh_strategy_handler() (and that is actually what we do).
I just want to understand how it is meant to work.
Looking back at the code to when libata first started to use
blk_abort_request()/scsi_req_abort_cmd(), DID_TIME_OUT was only set
if scsi_eh_scmd_add() failed:
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/7b70fc039824bc7303e4007a5f758f832de56611/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c#L181
Martin then moved the set_host_byte(scmd, DID_TIME_OUT)
to be done regardless if scsi_eh_scmd_add() failed or not in:
18a4d0a22ed6 ("[SCSI] Handle disk devices which can not process medium access commands")
without really explaining why.
Then in your commit:
2171b6d08bf8 ("scsi: make scsi_eh_scmd_add() always succeed")
you changed scsi_times_out() to:
+ if (host->hostt->no_async_abort ||
+ scsi_abort_command(scmd) != SUCCESS) {
+ set_host_byte(scmd, DID_TIME_OUT);
+ scsi_eh_scmd_add(scmd, SCSI_EH_CANCEL_CMD);
+ }
And it also changed scmd_eh_abort_handler():
- if (!scsi_eh_scmd_add(scmd, 0)) {
- SCSI_LOG_ERROR_RECOVERY(3,
- scmd_printk(KERN_WARNING, scmd,
- "terminate aborted command\n"));
- set_host_byte(scmd, DID_TIME_OUT);
- scsi_finish_command(scmd);
- }
+ scsi_eh_scmd_add(scmd, 0);
So for libata, which did not set host->hostt->no_async_abort,
scsi_abort_command() would return SUCCESS, so we would not go
into that if statement. Instead we would have the current behavior
where scmd_eh_abort_handler() fails, and does a goto out;
to add the scsi_eh_scmd_add() (without setting DID_TIME_OUT).
Should perhaps scmd_eh_abort_handler() perhaps set DID_TIME_OUT
unconditionally, to match the code before the change?
To me, it is not really clear how the SCSI code is meant to behave.
I think if the timeout has actually triggered, because the timer expired,
it makes sense that scsi_timeout() sets DID_TIME_OUT.
But if e.g. libata called blk_abort_request() to abort the command before
the timer actually expired, I'm not sure.
For ata part, it does not really matter, because currently, libata always
overwrites the scmd->result anyway. However, there might be other LLDD
where this change actually do matter.
(For the curious, libata's own way of detecting if the command actually
was a timeout from scsi_timeout() or if it was an aborted command works
like this:
If QCFLAG_FAILED is not set in .eh_strategy_handler, then libata EH does
not own the QC, so it was scsi_timeout() that won the race, without libata
ever aborting the command. It then sets qc->err_mask = AC_ERR_TIMEOUT).
So libata currently never looks at host_byte(), it always overwrites it,
and it instead uses its own way of detecting that a timeout occured, if so,
it freezes the port (disables IRQs) and resets the controller, and increases
smcd->allowed, such that the command is retried.)
Kind regards,
Niklas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread