From: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mauricfo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
gpiccoli@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: do not requeue requests unaligned with device sector size
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 21:11:09 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c7a174fc-aec4-e8bb-b7ad-8c53a87046de@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <yq1fulh1ivs.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
On 12/21/2016 05:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> How do you even get an unaligned residual count? Except for SES
> processor devices (which will only issue BLOCK_PC commands) this is
> not allowed by SPC:
>
> "The residual count shall be reported in bytes if the peripheral device
> type in the destination target descriptor is 03h (i.e., processor
device),
> and in destination device blocks for all other device type codes.
On 12/21/2016 06:09 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> Which actually would be pretty much my objection, too.
>
> This would only be applicable for 512e drives, where we _might_ end up
> with a residual smaller than the physical sector size.
> But that should be handled by firmware; after all, that's what the 'e'
> implies, right?
On 12/21/2016 12:01 PM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> I agree with Christoph and Hannes. Some of this falls into the gray area
> that's outside of the T10 spec (HBA programming interface guarantees)
> but it seems like a deficiency in the HBA to report a byte count that's
> not a multiple of the logical block size. A block can't be partially
> written. Either it made it or it didn't. Regardless of how the I/O is
> being broken up into frames at the transport level and at which offset
> the transfer was interrupted.
Christoph, Hannes, Martin,
Thank you all for your comments and pointers to the documentation/spec.
I'll carry it on with the HBA and storage folks.
cheers,
--
Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
IBM Linux Technology Center
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-21 23:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-20 2:02 [PATCH] scsi: do not requeue requests unaligned with device sector size Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
2016-12-20 11:45 ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2016-12-21 7:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-12-21 8:09 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-12-21 14:01 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-12-21 23:11 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira [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=c7a174fc-aec4-e8bb-b7ad-8c53a87046de@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=mauricfo@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=gpiccoli@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).