From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
Mike Christie <michael.christie@oracle.com>
Cc: "James E . J . Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: Retrying SCSI pass-through commands
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 12:33:13 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a23d7a8c-4a4a-4687-ae18-87b2b2fb9fcb@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b0f92045-d10f-4038-a746-e3d87e5830e8@acm.org>
On 8/1/24 5:22 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Recently I noticed that a particular UFS-based device does not resume
> correctly. The logs of the device show that sd_start_stop_device() does
> not retry the START STOP UNIT command if the device reports a unit
> attention. I think that's a bug in the SCSI core. The following hack
> makes resume work again. I think this confirms my understanding of this
> issue (sd_start_stop_device() sets RQF_PM):
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> index da7dac77f8cd..e21becc5bcf9 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> @@ -1816,6 +1816,8 @@ bool scsi_noretry_cmd(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd)
> * assume caller has checked sense and determined
> * the check condition was retryable.
> */
> + if (req->rq_flags & RQF_PM)
> + return false;
> if (req->cmd_flags & REQ_FAILFAST_DEV || blk_rq_is_passthrough(req))
> return true;
>
> My understanding is that SCSI pass-through commands submitted from
> user space must not be retried. Are there any objections against
> modifying the behavior of the SCSI core such that it retries
> REQ_OP_DRV_* operations submitted by the SCSI core, as illustrated
> by the pseudo-code below?
Looking at the code, e.g. sd_start_stop_device():
res = scsi_execute_cmd(sdp, cmd, REQ_OP_DRV_IN, NULL, 0, SD_TIMEOUT,
sdkp->max_retries, &exec_args);
It seems that it is expected that the retry count will be honored. But that
indeed is not the case as scsi_noretry_cmd() will always return false for
REQ_OP_DRV_* commands.
So may be we should have a RQF_USER_OP_DRV flag to differentiate user
REQ_OP_DRV_* passthrough commands from internally issued REQ_OP_DRV_* commands.
Or the reverse flag, e.g. RQF_INTERNAL_OP_DRV, that we can set in e.g.
scsi_execute_cmnd().
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> index da7dac77f8cd..e21becc5bcf9 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> @@ -1816,6 +1816,12 @@ bool scsi_noretry_cmd(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd)
> * assume caller has checked sense and determined
> * the check condition was retryable.
> */
> - if (req->cmd_flags & REQ_FAILFAST_DEV || blk_rq_is_passthrough(req))
> - return true;
> + if (req->cmd_flags & REQ_FAILFAST_DEV)
> + return true;
> + if (/* submitted by the SCSI core */)
> + return false;
> + if (blk_rq_is_passthrough(req))
> + return true;
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-01 3:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-31 20:22 RFC: Retrying SCSI pass-through commands Bart Van Assche
2024-08-01 3:33 ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2024-08-01 20:12 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-08-02 0:47 ` Damien Le Moal
2024-08-02 16:52 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-08-01 7:04 ` Damien Le Moal
2024-08-01 18:00 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-08-03 20:42 ` Mike Christie
2024-08-05 17:47 ` Damien Le Moal
2024-08-05 17:56 ` Bart Van Assche
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=a23d7a8c-4a4a-4687-ae18-87b2b2fb9fcb@kernel.org \
--to=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=michael.christie@oracle.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