From: Johannes Thumshirn <Johannes.Thumshirn@wdc.com>
To: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>,
Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: sd: Check physical sector alignment of sequential zone writes
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2023 08:57:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7154f10b-0abb-e042-18c3-7ddd5b13b345@wdc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1120bc4a-0c3a-47ab-8f33-cc3e048c10c2@opensource.wdc.com>
On 03.03.23 07:44, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 3/3/23 10:44, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote:
>> When host-managed SMR disks have different physical sector size and
>> logical sector size, writes to conventional zones should be aligned to
>> the logical sector size. On the other hand, ZBC/ZAC requires that writes
>> to sequential write required zones shall be aligned to the physical
>> sector size. Otherwise, the disks return the unaligned write command
>> error. However, this error is common with other failure reasons. The
>> error is also reported when the write start sector is not at the write
>> pointer, or the write end sector is not in the same zone.
>>
>> To clarify the write failure cause is the physical sector alignment,
>> confirm before issuing write commands that the writes to sequential
>> write required zones are aligned to the physical sector size. If not,
>> print a relevant error message. This makes failure analysis easier, and
>> also avoids error handling in low level drivers.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/scsi/sd.c | 10 ++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
>> index 47dafe6b8a66..6d115b2fa99a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
>> @@ -1123,6 +1123,7 @@ static blk_status_t sd_setup_read_write_cmnd(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd)
>> sector_t lba = sectors_to_logical(sdp, blk_rq_pos(rq));
>> sector_t threshold;
>> unsigned int nr_blocks = sectors_to_logical(sdp, blk_rq_sectors(rq));
>> + unsigned int pb_sectors = sdkp->physical_block_size >> SECTOR_SHIFT;
>> unsigned int mask = logical_to_sectors(sdp, 1) - 1;
>> bool write = rq_data_dir(rq) == WRITE;
>> unsigned char protect, fua;
>> @@ -1145,6 +1146,15 @@ static blk_status_t sd_setup_read_write_cmnd(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd)
>> goto fail;
>> }
>>
>> + if (sdkp->device->type == TYPE_ZBC && blk_rq_zone_is_seq(rq) &&
>> + (req_op(rq) == REQ_OP_WRITE || req_op(rq) == REQ_OP_ZONE_APPEND) &&
>> + (!IS_ALIGNED(blk_rq_pos(rq), pb_sectors) ||
>> + !IS_ALIGNED(blk_rq_sectors(rq), pb_sectors))) {
>> + scmd_printk(KERN_ERR, cmd,
>> + "Sequential write request not aligned to the physical block size\n");
>> + goto fail;
>> + }
>
> A little helper for this complicated check would be better, and that will avoid
> the built bot warning you got when CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ZONED is not set.
> Something like this:
>
Agreed, I like that :)
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> index a38c71511bc9..71e4e51898d8 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> @@ -1146,6 +1146,9 @@ static blk_status_t sd_setup_read_write_cmnd(struct
> scsi_cmnd *cmd)
> goto fail;
> }
>
> + if (sdkp->device->type == TYPE_ZBC && !sd_zbc_check_write(cmd))
> + goto fail;
> +
> if ((blk_rq_pos(rq) & mask) || (blk_rq_sectors(rq) & mask)) {
> scmd_printk(KERN_ERR, cmd, "request not aligned to the logical block size\n");
> goto fail;
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.h b/drivers/scsi/sd.h
> index 5eea762f84d1..f19711b92f25 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.h
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.h
> @@ -254,6 +254,8 @@ int sd_zbc_report_zones(struct gendisk *disk, sector_t sector,
> blk_status_t sd_zbc_prepare_zone_append(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd, sector_t *lba,
> unsigned int nr_blocks);
>
> +bool sd_zbc_check_write(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd);
> +
> #else /* CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ZONED */
>
> static inline void sd_zbc_free_zone_info(struct scsi_disk *sdkp) {}
> @@ -290,6 +292,11 @@ static inline blk_status_t
> sd_zbc_prepare_zone_append(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd,
>
> #define sd_zbc_report_zones NULL
>
> +static inline bool sd_zbc_check_write(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd)
> +{
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> #endif /* CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ZONED */
>
> void sd_print_sense_hdr(struct scsi_disk *sdkp, struct scsi_sense_hdr *sshdr);
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c b/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
> index 6b3a02d4406c..3025cb35f30c 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
> @@ -983,3 +983,33 @@ int sd_zbc_read_zones(struct scsi_disk *sdkp, u8
> buf[SD_BUF_SIZE])
>
> return ret;
> }
> +
> +/**
> + * sd_zbc_check_write - Check if a write to a sequential zone is aligned to
> + * the physical block size of the disk.
> + * @cmd: The command to check.
> + *
> + * Return false for write and zone append commands that are not aligned to
> + * the disk physical block size and true otherwise.
> + */
> +bool sd_zbc_check_write(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd)
> +{
> + struct request *rq = scsi_cmd_to_rq(cmd);
> + struct scsi_disk *sdkp = scsi_disk(rq->q->disk);
> + unsigned int pb_sectors = sdkp->physical_block_size >> SECTOR_SHIFT;
> +
> + if (!blk_rq_zone_is_seq(rq))
> + return true;
> +
> + if (req_op(rq) != REQ_OP_WRITE && req_op(rq) != REQ_OP_ZONE_APPEND)
> + return true;
> +
> + if (!IS_ALIGNED(blk_rq_pos(rq), pb_sectors) ||
> + !IS_ALIGNED(blk_rq_sectors(rq), pb_sectors)) {
> + scmd_printk(KERN_ERR, cmd,
> + "Write request not aligned to the physical block size\n");
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + return true;
> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-03 8:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-03 1:44 [PATCH 0/2] scsi: sd: Fix physical block size issues of host-managed zoned disks Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-03-03 1:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] scsi: sd: Check physical sector alignment of sequential zone writes Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2023-03-03 5:34 ` kernel test robot
2023-03-03 6:44 ` Damien Le Moal
2023-03-03 8:57 ` Johannes Thumshirn [this message]
2023-03-03 18:03 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-03-04 3:03 ` Damien Le Moal
2023-03-04 15:21 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-03-06 6:15 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2023-03-06 7:58 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2023-03-03 1:44 ` [PATCH 2/2] scsi: sd: Fix wrong zone_write_granularity value at revalidate Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
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=7154f10b-0abb-e042-18c3-7ddd5b13b345@wdc.com \
--to=johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com \
--cc=damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com \
/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