Linux SCSI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Garry <john.garry@linux.dev>
To: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <mkp@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 09/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Refuse a short WRITE ATOMIC (16) before writing it
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 10:30:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3fc3aab6-9eca-4d3e-81ea-92ee56de2af5@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260925071726.140915-22-cassel@kernel.org>

On 9/25/26 08:17, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> A write whose data-out buffer is shorter than its transfer length is
> short. An ordinary write transfers what the buffer holds and reports the
> rest as a residual, but an atomic write cannot be short: SBC-6 r02
> (T10/BSR INCITS 587), 4.28.1, requires each atomic write operation to
> write either all of its data or none of it, and 4.28.2 requires one that
> cannot complete to leave the LBAs that it specifies unaltered.
> 
> resp_atomic_write() does fail a short WRITE ATOMIC (16) with DID_ERROR,
> but only after do_device_access() has returned, and do_device_access()
> copies one logical block at a time, so by then the blocks that the
> buffer did hold have been written. An eight block WRITE ATOMIC (16) with
> a buffer of four fails having overwritten the first four.
> 
> Check the length of the buffer before writing anything, and fail the
> command with the same DID_ERROR as before.
> 
> Assisted-by: LLM
> Reviewed-by: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
> Fixes: 84f3a3c01d70 ("scsi: scsi_debug: Atomic write support")
> Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
> ---
> Tested with:
> 
>    modprobe scsi_debug sector_size=512 physblk_exp=3 dev_size_mb=128 \
>        atomic_wr=1 lbpu=1
> 
> issuing a WRITE ATOMIC (16) of eight blocks through SG_IO with a buffer
> of four blocks of 0xaa. It fails with DID_ERROR before and after this
> patch, but before it the first four blocks read back as 0xaa afterwards,
> and after it all eight read back as they were. A WRITE ATOMIC (16) with
> a full buffer writes all eight blocks, as before.
> 

What is the command which you use?

I am just wondering if this check should go into sd_setup_atomic_cmnd() 
or somewhere else higher up. I mean, this check is not really specific 
to scsi_debug, right?

> Changes since v6: the comment is reworded, as Damien suggested.
> ---
>   drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c | 4 ++++
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> index f59c4f11c851..c0bcf8155fc8 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> @@ -6247,6 +6247,10 @@ static int resp_atomic_write(struct scsi_cmnd *scp,
>   		}
>   	}
>   
> +	/* Short atomic writes are not allowed. */
> +	if (scsi_bufflen(scp) < len * sdebug_sector_size)
> +		return DID_ERROR << 16;
> +
>   	ret = do_device_access(sip, scp, 0, lba, len, 0, true, true);
>   	if (unlikely(ret == -1))
>   		return DID_ERROR << 16;


  reply	other threads:[~2026-09-25  9:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-25  7:17 [PATCH v7 00/11] scsi: scsi_debug: fix zoned write validation Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 01/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Refuse a zoned device with a non-zero lowest aligned LBA Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 02/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Make atomic writes and ZBC emulation mutually exclusive Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 03/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Take the zone metadata lock before the data lock Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 04/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Evaluate scsi_debug_lbp() only once Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 05/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Report the residual of a write Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 06/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Enforce physical block alignment of zoned writes Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 07/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Do not write a partial physical block to a zoned device Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 08/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Advance the write pointer over the data written Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 09/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Refuse a short WRITE ATOMIC (16) before writing it Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  9:30   ` John Garry [this message]
2026-09-26 18:03     ` Niklas Cassel
2026-09-28  8:52       ` John Garry
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 10/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Map the region written by WRITE ATOMIC (16) Niklas Cassel
2026-09-25  9:33   ` John Garry
2026-09-25  7:17 ` [PATCH v7 11/11] scsi: scsi_debug: Validate the access parameters of " Niklas Cassel

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=3fc3aab6-9eca-4d3e-81ea-92ee56de2af5@linux.dev \
    --to=john.garry@linux.dev \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=cassel@kernel.org \
    --cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mkp@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