From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 003.mia.mailroute.net (003.mia.mailroute.net [199.89.3.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5172269D16 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2025 15:41:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.3.6 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754581268; cv=none; b=jBfhM4I4NjM8ZtqEWGa+dzekfg7jLX2V194EFb3onWNJhJxa8QW/GiBYFVH65FPjg2dX9gRK/apLOg1ya1ijuzw+nJRXbmbj9HK0P1pnmYzqXa0EzfdV0BLErM7XFpAPjJg8ZNCqoP3sUPhGXQeIvSNYqDZBBCHZop1dm3T0RCE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754581268; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AcDnoczkFtLjKVUr+ke5mgdcPDNZrAC+7qRNvG6UCuc=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:From:To:Cc:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=f4N8HQa7XnQEKIok8lXdJuGyF9Wmb4wgEdjgDvGQh/SewRMVb0whjtddbE9pa9XLSJ6dF0v2QBpo7wpbR/JQUdygWlFAHu1Gx+o1onqaXtU+fJHchTSsY1LI/BCu+1soul2JAodjS4bJ4hTkXPGPozIsISnbTD0UiyYMauVbUQ8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b=XPSXQ6tx; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.3.6 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b="XPSXQ6tx" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 003.mia.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4byWbH1rBpzlgqxg; Thu, 7 Aug 2025 15:40:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=acm.org; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :content-language:references:from:from:subject:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:date:message-id:received:received; s=mr01; t=1754581257; x=1757173258; bh=QB1OidGUydLL0pDjZZwTI4X7 HFHrJOfwFYRmJezwl0Q=; b=XPSXQ6txmsxK2xa6PJdb7G67gUUdZCAdeqtCAkkR mTr+ICqbshMCbQ9cNvDSCwwNGljGFqG2Y7nRfOI4dnpo6UVnCtSiavLDzJt/1bIN zFnnHXbaicBB8tUkohEyxrstz+vXphBTDp+83f+lRrX0ngPjQx45rcLVUQmQnhX5 teKbJbkAb6O+j54+0bq9ULHgkQRWiXYdLOG/mw7HN6GORmig6NQsXyYSLveGEyBm 7tsy+YKebK0uhlgS04BaGw1ZVNrg/r/6syHIulTND8fqkTFJ4zODt3OuWOF1pCsb hJd8p7xIU6fHv0wwOeAM8jVjgNqDwh6xg6bzcHzPmXLYMw== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 003.mia.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (003.mia [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id Z88XmQvDx3HM; Thu, 7 Aug 2025 15:40:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [100.66.154.22] (unknown [104.135.204.82]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bvanassche@acm.org) by 003.mia.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4byWb66KlNzlgqy6; Thu, 7 Aug 2025 15:40:49 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2025 08:40:48 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/24] scsi: core: Implement reserved command handling From: Bart Van Assche To: John Garry , "Martin K . Petersen" Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Hannes Reinecke , "James E.J. Bottomley" References: <20250403211937.2225615-1-bvanassche@acm.org> <20250403211937.2225615-5-bvanassche@acm.org> <3c2fe290-5e24-4985-833c-24d8b80b98b7@oracle.com> <27e5c0e9-a042-45e3-9852-31adb966b781@acm.org> <959ed10a-27e4-4c63-b9bd-58fefc5c4775@acm.org> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 8/5/25 3:33 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 4/17/25 2:25 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> On 4/16/25 12:16 AM, John Garry wrote: >>> I'm not sure how that will look, but my preference is to fully >>> implement reserved tags support which can be used by all SCSI LLDs. >> >> I'm working on an implementation of this approach but it will take until >> next month until I will have the time to post a patch series that >> implements this approach. > > (replying to my own email from four months ago) > > Hi John, > > With this approach and with the UFSHCI 4.0 controller model I have on my > desk, I'm hitting a hardware bug in the controller. I see completions > where cqe->command_desc_base_addr is NULL although I triple checked that > this pointer is not NULL in any submission queue entry. Let's postpone > the conversion to allocating reserved requests via the block layer until > I have a setup on which I can test this conversion. (replying to my own email) I found an elegant workaround for the hardware bug that I ran into and will repost the entire patch series after the merge window has closed. Bart.