* Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-11-04 18:10 ` [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling Bart Van Assche
@ 2021-11-04 22:20 ` Bean Huo
2021-11-04 22:39 ` Daejun Park
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Bean Huo @ 2021-11-04 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche, Martin K . Petersen
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim, Adrian Hunter, linux-scsi, James E.J. Bottomley,
Can Guo, Bean Huo, Stanley Chu, Asutosh Das, James Bottomley,
Vinayak Holikatti, Vishak G, Girish K S, Santosh Yaraganavi
On Thu, 2021-11-04 at 11:10 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> The following has been observed on a test setup:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 250 at drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c:2737
> ufshcd_queuecommand+0x468/0x65c
> Call trace:
> ufshcd_queuecommand+0x468/0x65c
> scsi_send_eh_cmnd+0x224/0x6a0
> scsi_eh_test_devices+0x248/0x418
> scsi_eh_ready_devs+0xc34/0xe58
> scsi_error_handler+0x204/0x80c
> kthread+0x150/0x1b4
> ret_from_fork+0x10/0x30
>
> That warning is triggered by the following statement:
>
> WARN_ON(lrbp->cmd);
>
> Fix this warning by clearing lrbp->cmd from the abort handler.
>
> Fixes: 7a3e97b0dc4b ("[SCSI] ufshcd: UFS Host controller driver")
> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Reviewed-by: Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> index 3b4a714e2f68..d8a59258b1dc 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> @@ -7069,6 +7069,7 @@ static int ufshcd_abort(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd)
> goto release;
> }
>
> + lrbp->cmd = NULL;
> err = SUCCESS;
>
> release:
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-11-04 18:10 ` [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling Bart Van Assche
2021-11-04 22:20 ` Bean Huo
@ 2021-11-04 22:39 ` Daejun Park
2021-11-04 23:14 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-11-07 6:59 ` Stanley Chu
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Daejun Park @ 2021-11-04 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche, Martin K . Petersen
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim, Adrian Hunter, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
James E.J. Bottomley, Can Guo, Stanley Chu, Asutosh Das,
James Bottomley, Vinayak Holikatti, VISHAK G, Girish K S,
Santosh Yaraganavi, huobean@gmail.com
Hi Bart,
>diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>index 3b4a714e2f68..d8a59258b1dc 100644
>--- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>+++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>@@ -7069,6 +7069,7 @@ static int ufshcd_abort(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd)
> goto release;
> }
>
>+ lrbp->cmd = NULL;
> err = SUCCESS;
>
> release:
I found similar code in the ufshcd_err_handler(). I think the following
patch will required to fix another warning.
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
index f5ba8f953b87..cce9abc6b879 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
@@ -6190,6 +6190,7 @@ static void ufshcd_err_handler(struct work_struct *work)
}
dev_err(hba->dev, "Aborted tag %d / CDB %#02x\n", tag,
hba->lrb[tag].cmd ? hba->lrb[tag].cmd->cmnd[0] : -1);
+ hba->lrb[tag].cmd = NULL;
}
/* Clear pending task management requests */
Thanks,
Daejun
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-11-04 22:39 ` Daejun Park
@ 2021-11-04 23:14 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-11-04 23:39 ` Daejun Park
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2021-11-04 23:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: daejun7.park, Martin K . Petersen
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim, Adrian Hunter, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
James E.J. Bottomley, Can Guo, Stanley Chu, Asutosh Das,
James Bottomley, Vinayak Holikatti, VISHAK G, Girish K S,
Santosh Yaraganavi, huobean@gmail.com
On 11/4/21 3:39 PM, Daejun Park wrote:
> I found similar code in the ufshcd_err_handler(). I think the following
> patch will required to fix another warning.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> index f5ba8f953b87..cce9abc6b879 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> @@ -6190,6 +6190,7 @@ static void ufshcd_err_handler(struct work_struct *work)
> }
> dev_err(hba->dev, "Aborted tag %d / CDB %#02x\n", tag,
> hba->lrb[tag].cmd ? hba->lrb[tag].cmd->cmnd[0] : -1);
> + hba->lrb[tag].cmd = NULL;
> }
>
> /* Clear pending task management requests */
Hmm ... since the error handler calls ufshcd_complete_requests(),
shouldn't the completion function clear the 'cmd' member? I'm concerned
that the above change would break the completion handler.
Thanks,
Bart.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-11-04 23:14 ` Bart Van Assche
@ 2021-11-04 23:39 ` Daejun Park
2021-11-04 23:54 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Daejun Park @ 2021-11-04 23:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche, Daejun Park, Martin K . Petersen
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim, Adrian Hunter, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
James E.J. Bottomley, Can Guo, Stanley Chu, Asutosh Das,
James Bottomley, Vinayak Holikatti, VISHAK G, Girish K S,
Santosh Yaraganavi, huobean@gmail.com
>On 11/4/21 3:39 PM, Daejun Park wrote:
>> I found similar code in the ufshcd_err_handler(). I think the following
>> patch will required to fix another warning.
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> index f5ba8f953b87..cce9abc6b879 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> @@ -6190,6 +6190,7 @@ static void ufshcd_err_handler(struct work_struct *work)
>> }
>> dev_err(hba->dev, "Aborted tag %d / CDB %#02x\n", tag,
>> hba->lrb[tag].cmd ? hba->lrb[tag].cmd->cmnd[0] : -1);
>> + hba->lrb[tag].cmd = NULL;
>> }
>>
>> /* Clear pending task management requests */
>
>Hmm ... since the error handler calls ufshcd_complete_requests(),
>shouldn't the completion function clear the 'cmd' member? I'm concerned
>that the above change would break the completion handler.
I missed that the error handler calls ufshcd_complete_requests(). Please
ignore my suggestion.
By the way, I give my reviewed-by tag.
Reviewed-by: Daejun Park <daejun7.park@samsung.com>
Thanks,
Daejun
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-11-04 23:39 ` Daejun Park
@ 2021-11-04 23:54 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-11-05 1:53 ` Daejun Park
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2021-11-04 23:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: daejun7.park, Martin K . Petersen
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim, Adrian Hunter, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
James E.J. Bottomley, Can Guo, Stanley Chu, Asutosh Das,
James Bottomley, Vinayak Holikatti, VISHAK G, Girish K S,
Santosh Yaraganavi, huobean@gmail.com
On 11/4/21 4:39 PM, Daejun Park wrote:
>> On 11/4/21 3:39 PM, Daejun Park wrote:
>>> I found similar code in the ufshcd_err_handler(). I think the following
>>> patch will required to fix another warning.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>>> index f5ba8f953b87..cce9abc6b879 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>>> @@ -6190,6 +6190,7 @@ static void ufshcd_err_handler(struct work_struct *work)
>>> }
>>> dev_err(hba->dev, "Aborted tag %d / CDB %#02x\n", tag,
>>> hba->lrb[tag].cmd ? hba->lrb[tag].cmd->cmnd[0] : -1);
>>> + hba->lrb[tag].cmd = NULL;
>>> }
>>>
>>> /* Clear pending task management requests */
>>
>> Hmm ... since the error handler calls ufshcd_complete_requests(),
>> shouldn't the completion function clear the 'cmd' member? I'm concerned
>> that the above change would break the completion handler.
>
> I missed that the error handler calls ufshcd_complete_requests(). Please
> ignore my suggestion.
>
> By the way, I give my reviewed-by tag.
>
> Reviewed-by: Daejun Park <daejun7.park@samsung.com>
Thanks Daejun! However, your question made me wonder whether ufshcd_abort()
should clear the 'tag' bit from hba->outstanding_reqs. Although the SCSI
standard requires that a command that is aborted is not completed, the UFSHCI
specification requires that writing into the UTRLCLR register clears the
corresponding bit(s) in the UTRLDBR register. I think bit 'tag' will have to
be cleared from hba->outstanding_reqs to prevent that the aborted request is
completed while the SCSI core is resubmitting it.
Thanks,
Bart.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-11-04 23:54 ` Bart Van Assche
@ 2021-11-05 1:53 ` Daejun Park
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Daejun Park @ 2021-11-05 1:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche, Daejun Park, Martin K . Petersen
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim, Adrian Hunter, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
James E.J. Bottomley, Can Guo, Stanley Chu, Asutosh Das,
James Bottomley, Vinayak Holikatti, VISHAK G, Girish K S,
Santosh Yaraganavi, huobean@gmail.com
>On 11/4/21 4:39 PM, Daejun Park wrote:
>>> On 11/4/21 3:39 PM, Daejun Park wrote:
>>>> I found similar code in the ufshcd_err_handler(). I think the following
>>>> patch will required to fix another warning.
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>>>> index f5ba8f953b87..cce9abc6b879 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>>>> @@ -6190,6 +6190,7 @@ static void ufshcd_err_handler(struct work_struct *work)
>>>> }
>>>> dev_err(hba->dev, "Aborted tag %d / CDB %#02x\n", tag,
>>>> hba->lrb[tag].cmd ? hba->lrb[tag].cmd->cmnd[0] : -1);
>>>> + hba->lrb[tag].cmd = NULL;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> /* Clear pending task management requests */
>>>
>>> Hmm ... since the error handler calls ufshcd_complete_requests(),
>>> shouldn't the completion function clear the 'cmd' member? I'm concerned
>>> that the above change would break the completion handler.
>>
>> I missed that the error handler calls ufshcd_complete_requests(). Please
>> ignore my suggestion.
>>
>> By the way, I give my reviewed-by tag.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Daejun Park <daejun7.park@samsung.com>
>
>Thanks Daejun! However, your question made me wonder whether ufshcd_abort()
>should clear the 'tag' bit from hba->outstanding_reqs. Although the SCSI
>standard requires that a command that is aborted is not completed, the UFSHCI
>specification requires that writing into the UTRLCLR register clears the
>corresponding bit(s) in the UTRLDBR register. I think bit 'tag' will have to
>be cleared from hba->outstanding_reqs to prevent that the aborted request is
>completed while the SCSI core is resubmitting it.
My understanding is the completion of aborted request can be duplicated
because SCSI core will resubmit the request. Therefore the clearing of the
bit can avoid duplicated completion of the request.
Thanks,
Daejun
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-11-04 18:10 ` [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling Bart Van Assche
2021-11-04 22:20 ` Bean Huo
2021-11-04 22:39 ` Daejun Park
@ 2021-11-07 6:59 ` Stanley Chu
2021-11-09 4:03 ` Martin K. Petersen
2021-11-19 4:16 ` Martin K. Petersen
4 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Chu @ 2021-11-07 6:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche, Martin K . Petersen
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim, Adrian Hunter, linux-scsi, James E.J. Bottomley,
Can Guo, Bean Huo, Asutosh Das, James Bottomley,
Vinayak Holikatti, Vishak G, Girish K S, Santosh Yaraganavi
Hi Bart,
On Thu, 2021-11-04 at 11:10 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> The following has been observed on a test setup:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 250 at drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c:2737
> ufshcd_queuecommand+0x468/0x65c
> Call trace:
> ufshcd_queuecommand+0x468/0x65c
> scsi_send_eh_cmnd+0x224/0x6a0
> scsi_eh_test_devices+0x248/0x418
> scsi_eh_ready_devs+0xc34/0xe58
> scsi_error_handler+0x204/0x80c
> kthread+0x150/0x1b4
> ret_from_fork+0x10/0x30
>
> That warning is triggered by the following statement:
>
> WARN_ON(lrbp->cmd);
>
> Fix this warning by clearing lrbp->cmd from the abort handler.
>
> Fixes: 7a3e97b0dc4b ("[SCSI] ufshcd: UFS Host controller driver")
> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> index 3b4a714e2f68..d8a59258b1dc 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> @@ -7069,6 +7069,7 @@ static int ufshcd_abort(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd)
> goto release;
> }
>
> + lrbp->cmd = NULL;
> err = SUCCESS;
>
> release:
Thanks for this patch! We are looking at the same issue as well
recently.
Reviewed-by: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-11-04 18:10 ` [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling Bart Van Assche
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-07 6:59 ` Stanley Chu
@ 2021-11-09 4:03 ` Martin K. Petersen
2021-11-19 4:16 ` Martin K. Petersen
4 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Martin K. Petersen @ 2021-11-09 4:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche
Cc: Martin K . Petersen, Jaegeuk Kim, Adrian Hunter, linux-scsi,
James E.J. Bottomley, Can Guo, Bean Huo, Stanley Chu, Asutosh Das,
James Bottomley, Vinayak Holikatti, Vishak G, Girish K S,
Santosh Yaraganavi
Bart,
> That warning is triggered by the following statement:
>
> WARN_ON(lrbp->cmd);
>
> Fix this warning by clearing lrbp->cmd from the abort handler.
Applied to 5.16/scsi-staging, thanks!
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-11-04 18:10 ` [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling Bart Van Assche
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-09 4:03 ` Martin K. Petersen
@ 2021-11-19 4:16 ` Martin K. Petersen
2021-12-14 16:35 ` James Bottomley
4 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Martin K. Petersen @ 2021-11-19 4:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche
Cc: Martin K . Petersen, Santosh Yaraganavi, Can Guo, Bean Huo,
Vishak G, Stanley Chu, Adrian Hunter, James Bottomley,
Jaegeuk Kim, Girish K S, James E.J. Bottomley, linux-scsi,
Asutosh Das, Vinayak Holikatti
On Thu, 4 Nov 2021 11:10:53 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> The following has been observed on a test setup:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 250 at drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c:2737 ufshcd_queuecommand+0x468/0x65c
> Call trace:
> ufshcd_queuecommand+0x468/0x65c
> scsi_send_eh_cmnd+0x224/0x6a0
> scsi_eh_test_devices+0x248/0x418
> scsi_eh_ready_devs+0xc34/0xe58
> scsi_error_handler+0x204/0x80c
> kthread+0x150/0x1b4
> ret_from_fork+0x10/0x30
>
> [...]
Applied to 5.16/scsi-fixes, thanks!
[1/1] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
https://git.kernel.org/mkp/scsi/c/3ff1f6b6ba6f
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-11-19 4:16 ` Martin K. Petersen
@ 2021-12-14 16:35 ` James Bottomley
2021-12-14 17:37 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: James Bottomley @ 2021-12-14 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin K. Petersen, Bart Van Assche
Cc: Santosh Yaraganavi, Can Guo, Bean Huo, Vishak G, Stanley Chu,
Adrian Hunter, Jaegeuk Kim, Girish K S, linux-scsi, Asutosh Das,
Vinayak Holikatti
On Thu, 2021-11-18 at 23:16 -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Nov 2021 11:10:53 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>
> > The following has been observed on a test setup:
> >
> > WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 250 at drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c:2737
> > ufshcd_queuecommand+0x468/0x65c
> > Call trace:
> > ufshcd_queuecommand+0x468/0x65c
> > scsi_send_eh_cmnd+0x224/0x6a0
> > scsi_eh_test_devices+0x248/0x418
> > scsi_eh_ready_devs+0xc34/0xe58
> > scsi_error_handler+0x204/0x80c
> > kthread+0x150/0x1b4
> > ret_from_fork+0x10/0x30
> >
> > [...]
>
> Applied to 5.16/scsi-fixes, thanks!
>
> [1/1] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
> https://git.kernel.org/mkp/scsi/c/3ff1f6b6ba6f
OK, so now we have a conflict between fixes and queue. My impression
is that the patch causing the conflict:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211203231950.193369-14-bvanassche@acm.org/
Actually supersedes this one, so I can simply drop the entirety of this
patch in fixes, is that correct?
James
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-12-14 16:35 ` James Bottomley
@ 2021-12-14 17:37 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-12-14 17:43 ` James Bottomley
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2021-12-14 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: James Bottomley, Martin K. Petersen
Cc: Santosh Yaraganavi, Can Guo, Bean Huo, Vishak G, Stanley Chu,
Adrian Hunter, Jaegeuk Kim, Girish K S, linux-scsi, Asutosh Das,
Vinayak Holikatti
On 12/14/21 8:35 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-11-18 at 23:16 -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>> Applied to 5.16/scsi-fixes, thanks!
>>
>> [1/1] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
>> https://git.kernel.org/mkp/scsi/c/3ff1f6b6ba6f
>
> OK, so now we have a conflict between fixes and queue. My impression
> is that the patch causing the conflict:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211203231950.193369-14-bvanassche@acm.org/
>
> Actually supersedes this one, so I can simply drop the entirety of this
> patch in fixes, is that correct?
Hi James,
Commit 1fbaa02dfd05 ("scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling further") is
intended as an improvement for commit 3ff1f6b6ba6f ("scsi: ufs: core:
Improve SCSI abort handling"). Since commit 3ff1f6b6ba6f is already in
Linus' tree I don't think that it can be dropped? A possible approach is
to revert commit 3ff1f6b6ba6f before merging the mkp-scsi/for-next branch.
Thanks,
Bart.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-12-14 17:37 ` Bart Van Assche
@ 2021-12-14 17:43 ` James Bottomley
2021-12-14 17:45 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: James Bottomley @ 2021-12-14 17:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche, Martin K. Petersen
Cc: Santosh Yaraganavi, Can Guo, Bean Huo, Vishak G, Stanley Chu,
Adrian Hunter, Jaegeuk Kim, Girish K S, linux-scsi, Asutosh Das,
Vinayak Holikatti
On Tue, 2021-12-14 at 09:37 -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 12/14/21 8:35 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Thu, 2021-11-18 at 23:16 -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> > > Applied to 5.16/scsi-fixes, thanks!
> > >
> > > [1/1] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
> > > https://git.kernel.org/mkp/scsi/c/3ff1f6b6ba6f
> >
> > OK, so now we have a conflict between fixes and queue. My
> > impression
> > is that the patch causing the conflict:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211203231950.193369-14-bvanassche@acm.org/
> >
> > Actually supersedes this one, so I can simply drop the entirety of
> > this patch in fixes, is that correct?
>
> Hi James,
>
> Commit 1fbaa02dfd05 ("scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
> further") is intended as an improvement for commit 3ff1f6b6ba6f
> ("scsi: ufs: core: Improve SCSI abort handling"). Since commit
> 3ff1f6b6ba6f is already in Linus' tree I don't think that it can be
> dropped? A possible approach is to revert commit 3ff1f6b6ba6f before
> merging the mkp-scsi/for-next branch.
I meant the effect of the fixes patch can be dropped in the merge
commit. So the sole surviving code is from the misc tree. Like what I
did at the top of the for-next branch:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=014adbc9a838772b265834a55cd7b13eb2665d7e
James
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Improve SCSI abort handling
2021-12-14 17:43 ` James Bottomley
@ 2021-12-14 17:45 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2021-12-14 17:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: James Bottomley, Martin K. Petersen
Cc: Santosh Yaraganavi, Can Guo, Bean Huo, Vishak G, Stanley Chu,
Adrian Hunter, Jaegeuk Kim, Girish K S, linux-scsi, Asutosh Das,
Vinayak Holikatti
On 12/14/21 9:43 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> I meant the effect of the fixes patch can be dropped in the merge
> commit. So the sole surviving code is from the misc tree. Like what I
> did at the top of the for-next branch:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=014adbc9a838772b265834a55cd7b13eb2665d7e
Thanks for the clarification. The ufshcd_abort() code at the above URL
looks good to me.
Thanks,
Bart.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread