libata/ipr/powerpc: regression between 2.6.39-rc4 and 2.6.39-rc5

libata/ipr/powerpc: regression between 2.6.39-rc4 and 2.6.39-rc5

[Nishanth Aravamudan]

Hi Jeff,

It appears that commit 7b3a24c57d2eeda8dba9c205342b12689c4679f9 broke
CD-ROMs on the IPR SATA bus on powerpc machines:

 ata_port_alloc: ENTER
 ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe begin
 ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
 ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
 ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
 ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
 ata1.00: limiting speed to UDMA7:PIO5
 ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
 ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
 ata1.00: disabled
 ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe end
 scsi_alloc_sdev: Allocation failure during SCSI scanning, some SCSI devices might not be configured

The commit in question is tagged as AHCI, but does touch the libata
core. I'm not well-versed with this code, but here's what I think I know
:)

>From __scsi_add_device, we first allocate the target:

 scsi_alloc_target ->
  shost->hostt->target_alloc ->
   ipr_target_alloc ->
    ata_port_alloc ->
     sets FROZEN

We error out when we allocate the sdev:

 scsi_alloc_sdev ->
  shost->hostt->slave_alloc ->
   ipr_slave_alloc ->
    ipr_ata_slave_alloc ->
     ata_sas_port_init ->
      ata_port_probe

>From what I can tell, the only place that explicitly clears the FROZEN
flag is the error-handling code via ata_eh_thaw_port().

So I thought either we're not invoking the error-handler at probe time
correctly to kick the port or perhaps the SAS code is not clearing the
flag?

I tried the following patch:

diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
index d51f979..abd0e0b 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
@@ -3797,6 +3797,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_alloc);
  */
 int ata_sas_port_start(struct ata_port *ap)
 {
+       ap->pflags &= ~ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN;
        return 0;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_start);

and the CD-ROM drive works, but I have no idea if it's the right thing
to do. I chose this particular change, FWIW, because we call
ata_sas_port_start before we probe in ata_sas_port_init and it seems
like we need to mark the port as not frozen before we init it? Perhaps
that should really be a call to a thaw function, not sure. Let's just
say the ATA/SAS/SCSI interactions are a bit hard to follow at first :)

Any insight you can provide would be great!

Thanks,
Nish


-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

Re: libata/ipr/powerpc: regression between 2.6.39-rc4 and 2.6.39-rc5

[Brian King]

On 06/15/2011 02:17 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> From what I can tell, the only place that explicitly clears the FROZEN
> flag is the error-handling code via ata_eh_thaw_port().
> 
> So I thought either we're not invoking the error-handler at probe time
> correctly to kick the port or perhaps the SAS code is not clearing the
> flag?
> 
> I tried the following patch:
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> index d51f979..abd0e0b 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> @@ -3797,6 +3797,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_alloc);
>   */
>  int ata_sas_port_start(struct ata_port *ap)
>  {
> +       ap->pflags &= ~ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN;
>         return 0;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_start);
> 
> and the CD-ROM drive works, but I have no idea if it's the right thing
> to do. I chose this particular change, FWIW, because we call
> ata_sas_port_start before we probe in ata_sas_port_init and it seems
> like we need to mark the port as not frozen before we init it? Perhaps
> that should really be a call to a thaw function, not sure. Let's just
> say the ATA/SAS/SCSI interactions are a bit hard to follow at first :)

That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
is not NULL.

Thanks,

Brian


-- 
Brian King
Linux on Power Virtualization
IBM Linux Technology Center

Re: libata/ipr/powerpc: regression between 2.6.39-rc4 and 2.6.39-rc5

[Nishanth Aravamudan]

On 15.06.2011 [15:02:18 -0500], Brian King wrote:
> On 06/15/2011 02:17 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > From what I can tell, the only place that explicitly clears the FROZEN
> > flag is the error-handling code via ata_eh_thaw_port().
> > 
> > So I thought either we're not invoking the error-handler at probe time
> > correctly to kick the port or perhaps the SAS code is not clearing the
> > flag?
> > 
> > I tried the following patch:
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > index d51f979..abd0e0b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > @@ -3797,6 +3797,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_alloc);
> >   */
> >  int ata_sas_port_start(struct ata_port *ap)
> >  {
> > +       ap->pflags &= ~ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN;
> >         return 0;
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_start);
> > 
> > and the CD-ROM drive works, but I have no idea if it's the right thing
> > to do. I chose this particular change, FWIW, because we call
> > ata_sas_port_start before we probe in ata_sas_port_init and it seems
> > like we need to mark the port as not frozen before we init it? Perhaps
> > that should really be a call to a thaw function, not sure. Let's just
> > say the ATA/SAS/SCSI interactions are a bit hard to follow at first :)
> 
> That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
> libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
> should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
> only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
> is not NULL.

It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.

Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

Re: libata/ipr/powerpc: regression between 2.6.39-rc4 and 2.6.39-rc5

[Tejun Heo]

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
> > libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
> > should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
> > only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
> > is not NULL.
> 
> It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
> appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
> not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.
> 
> Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
> ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
> ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?

Maybe we can test error_handler in ata_sas_port_start()?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

Re: libata/ipr/powerpc: regression between 2.6.39-rc4 and 2.6.39-rc5

[Brian King]

On 06/16/2011 02:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
>>> That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
>>> libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
>>> should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
>>> only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
>>> is not NULL.
>>
>> It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
>> appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
>> not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.
>>
>> Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
>> ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
>> ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?
> 
> Maybe we can test error_handler in ata_sas_port_start()?

Good point. Since libsas is converted to the new eh now, we would need to have
this test.

Thanks,

Brian

-- 
Brian King
Linux on Power Virtualization
IBM Linux Technology Center

[PATCH] libata/sas: only set FROZEN flag if new EH is supported

[Nishanth Aravamudan]

On 16.06.2011 [08:28:39 -0500], Brian King wrote:
> On 06/16/2011 02:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> >>> That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
> >>> libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
> >>> should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
> >>> only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
> >>> is not NULL.
> >>
> >> It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
> >> appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
> >> not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.
> >>
> >> Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
> >> ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
> >> ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?
> > 
> > Maybe we can test error_handler in ata_sas_port_start()?
> 
> Good point. Since libsas is converted to the new eh now, we would need to have
> this test.

Commit 7b3a24c57d2eeda8dba9c205342b12689c4679f9 ("ahci: don't enable
port irq before handler is registered") caused a regression for CD-ROMs
attached to the IPR SATA bus on Power machines:

  ata_port_alloc: ENTER
  ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe begin
  ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
  ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
  ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
  ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
  ata1.00: limiting speed to UDMA7:PIO5
  ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
  ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
  ata1.00: disabled
  ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe end
  scsi_alloc_sdev: Allocation failure during SCSI scanning, some SCSI devices might not be configured

The FROZEN flag added in that commit is only cleared by the new EH code,
which is not used by ipr. Clear this flag in the SAS code if we don't
support new EH.

Reported-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>

diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
index d51f979..ebe1685 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
@@ -3797,6 +3797,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_alloc);
  */
 int ata_sas_port_start(struct ata_port *ap)
 {
+	/*
+	 * the port is marked as frozen at allocation time, but if we don't
+	 * have new eh, we won't thaw it
+	 */
+	if (!ap->ops->error_handler)
+		ap->pflags &= ~ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN;
 	return 0;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_start);


-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

Re: [PATCH] libata/sas: only set FROZEN flag if new EH is supported

[Nishanth Aravamudan]

Ping on this -- Tejun, Brian, Jeff, this is a pretty annoying 2.6.39
regression which it would be good to have fixed in 3.0.

Thanks,
Nish

On 16.06.2011 [08:28:36 -0700], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 16.06.2011 [08:28:39 -0500], Brian King wrote:
> > On 06/16/2011 02:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > >>> That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
> > >>> libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
> > >>> should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
> > >>> only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
> > >>> is not NULL.
> > >>
> > >> It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
> > >> appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
> > >> not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.
> > >>
> > >> Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
> > >> ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
> > >> ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?
> > > 
> > > Maybe we can test error_handler in ata_sas_port_start()?
> > 
> > Good point. Since libsas is converted to the new eh now, we would need to have
> > this test.
> 
> Commit 7b3a24c57d2eeda8dba9c205342b12689c4679f9 ("ahci: don't enable
> port irq before handler is registered") caused a regression for CD-ROMs
> attached to the IPR SATA bus on Power machines:
> 
>   ata_port_alloc: ENTER
>   ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe begin
>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
>   ata1.00: limiting speed to UDMA7:PIO5
>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
>   ata1.00: disabled
>   ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe end
>   scsi_alloc_sdev: Allocation failure during SCSI scanning, some SCSI devices might not be configured
> 
> The FROZEN flag added in that commit is only cleared by the new EH code,
> which is not used by ipr. Clear this flag in the SAS code if we don't
> support new EH.
> 
> Reported-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> index d51f979..ebe1685 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> @@ -3797,6 +3797,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_alloc);
>   */
>  int ata_sas_port_start(struct ata_port *ap)
>  {
> +	/*
> +	 * the port is marked as frozen at allocation time, but if we don't
> +	 * have new eh, we won't thaw it
> +	 */
> +	if (!ap->ops->error_handler)
> +		ap->pflags &= ~ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN;
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_start);
> 
> 
> -- 
> Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
> IBM Linux Technology Center

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

Re: [PATCH] libata/sas: only set FROZEN flag if new EH is supported

[Brian King]

Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?

Thanks,

Brian

On 06/21/2011 11:07 AM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> Ping on this -- Tejun, Brian, Jeff, this is a pretty annoying 2.6.39
> regression which it would be good to have fixed in 3.0.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nish
> 
> On 16.06.2011 [08:28:36 -0700], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
>> On 16.06.2011 [08:28:39 -0500], Brian King wrote:
>>> On 06/16/2011 02:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
>>>>>> That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
>>>>>> libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
>>>>>> should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
>>>>>> only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
>>>>>> is not NULL.
>>>>>
>>>>> It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
>>>>> appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
>>>>> not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
>>>>> ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
>>>>> ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we can test error_handler in ata_sas_port_start()?
>>>
>>> Good point. Since libsas is converted to the new eh now, we would need to have
>>> this test.
>>
>> Commit 7b3a24c57d2eeda8dba9c205342b12689c4679f9 ("ahci: don't enable
>> port irq before handler is registered") caused a regression for CD-ROMs
>> attached to the IPR SATA bus on Power machines:
>>
>>   ata_port_alloc: ENTER
>>   ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe begin
>>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
>>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
>>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
>>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
>>   ata1.00: limiting speed to UDMA7:PIO5
>>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
>>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
>>   ata1.00: disabled
>>   ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe end
>>   scsi_alloc_sdev: Allocation failure during SCSI scanning, some SCSI devices might not be configured
>>
>> The FROZEN flag added in that commit is only cleared by the new EH code,
>> which is not used by ipr. Clear this flag in the SAS code if we don't
>> support new EH.
>>
>> Reported-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
>> index d51f979..ebe1685 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
>> @@ -3797,6 +3797,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_alloc);
>>   */
>>  int ata_sas_port_start(struct ata_port *ap)
>>  {
>> +	/*
>> +	 * the port is marked as frozen at allocation time, but if we don't
>> +	 * have new eh, we won't thaw it
>> +	 */
>> +	if (!ap->ops->error_handler)
>> +		ap->pflags &= ~ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN;
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_start);
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
>> IBM Linux Technology Center
> 


-- 
Brian King
Linux on Power Virtualization
IBM Linux Technology Center

Re: [PATCH] libata/sas: only set FROZEN flag if new EH is supported

[Jeff Garzik]

On 06/21/2011 04:30 PM, Brian King wrote:
> Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?

Looks good here too -- though of course we want to move towards purging 
old-EH paths :)

Queued...

Re: [PATCH] libata/sas: only set FROZEN flag if new EH is supported

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:30 -0500, Brian King wrote:
> Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?

BTW. Current upstream with that patch applied on a machine here leads to
several oddities, I don't know at this point whether any of that is
actually a regression :




> Thanks,
> 
> Brian
> 
> On 06/21/2011 11:07 AM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > Ping on this -- Tejun, Brian, Jeff, this is a pretty annoying 2.6.39
> > regression which it would be good to have fixed in 3.0.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Nish
> > 
> > On 16.06.2011 [08:28:36 -0700], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> >> On 16.06.2011 [08:28:39 -0500], Brian King wrote:
> >>> On 06/16/2011 02:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> >>>>>> That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
> >>>>>> libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
> >>>>>> should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
> >>>>>> only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
> >>>>>> is not NULL.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
> >>>>> appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
> >>>>> not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
> >>>>> ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
> >>>>> ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe we can test error_handler in ata_sas_port_start()?
> >>>
> >>> Good point. Since libsas is converted to the new eh now, we would need to have
> >>> this test.
> >>
> >> Commit 7b3a24c57d2eeda8dba9c205342b12689c4679f9 ("ahci: don't enable
> >> port irq before handler is registered") caused a regression for CD-ROMs
> >> attached to the IPR SATA bus on Power machines:
> >>
> >>   ata_port_alloc: ENTER
> >>   ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe begin
> >>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
> >>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
> >>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
> >>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
> >>   ata1.00: limiting speed to UDMA7:PIO5
> >>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
> >>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
> >>   ata1.00: disabled
> >>   ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe end
> >>   scsi_alloc_sdev: Allocation failure during SCSI scanning, some SCSI devices might not be configured
> >>
> >> The FROZEN flag added in that commit is only cleared by the new EH code,
> >> which is not used by ipr. Clear this flag in the SAS code if we don't
> >> support new EH.
> >>
> >> Reported-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> >> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> >> index d51f979..ebe1685 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> >> @@ -3797,6 +3797,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_alloc);
> >>   */
> >>  int ata_sas_port_start(struct ata_port *ap)
> >>  {
> >> +	/*
> >> +	 * the port is marked as frozen at allocation time, but if we don't
> >> +	 * have new eh, we won't thaw it
> >> +	 */
> >> +	if (!ap->ops->error_handler)
> >> +		ap->pflags &= ~ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN;
> >>  	return 0;
> >>  }
> >>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_start);
> >>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
> >> IBM Linux Technology Center
> > 
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH] libata/sas: only set FROZEN flag if new EH is supported

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 14:31 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:30 -0500, Brian King wrote:
> > Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?
> 
> BTW. Current upstream with that patch applied on a machine here leads to
> several oddities, I don't know at this point whether any of that is
> actually a regression :

Ooops... pressed "send" too quickly. Here's a log excerpt with some
comments:

ipr: IBM Power RAID SCSI Device Driver version: 2.5.2 (April 27, 2011)
ipr 0000:04:00.0: Found IOA with IRQ: 129
ipr 0000:04:00.0: Initializing IOA.
ipr 0000:04:00.0: Starting IOA initialization sequence.
ipr 0000:04:00.0: Adapter firmware version: 04220029
ipr 0000:04:00.0: IOA initialized.
scsi0 : IBM 2B4C Storage Adapter
scsi 0:0:4:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36

-> Are these odd INQUIRY results expected ?

scsi 0:0:5:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
scsi 0:0:6:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
scsi 0:0:7:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
scsi 0:0:18:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
scsi 0:2:18:0: Enclosure         IBM      PSBPD6E4A  3GSAS 0109 PQ: 0 ANSI: 4
scsi: unknown device type 31
scsi 0:255:255:255: No Device         IBM      2B4C001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0

-> The above looks odd, not sure what it means

ipr 0000:05:00.0: Found IOA with IRQ: 130
ipr 0000:05:00.0: Initializing IOA.
scsi 0:254:0:0: Processor         IBM      57CB001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
ipr 0000:05:00.0: Starting IOA initialization sequence.
ipr 0000:05:00.0: Adapter firmware version: 04220029
ipr 0000:05:00.0: IOA initialized.
scsi1 : IBM 57CB Storage Adapter
scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
scsi 1:0:4:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
scsi 1:0:5:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
scsi 1:0:6:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
scsi 1:0:7:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
scsi 1:0:18:0: Enclosure         IBM      PSBPD6E4A  3GSAS 0109 PQ: 0 ANSI: 4
scsi: On host 1 channel 0 id 18 only 511 (max_scsi_report_luns) of 402653184 luns reported, try increasing max_scsi_report_luns.
scsi: host 1 channel 0 id 18 lun 0xc0000007f01e810f has a LUN larger than currently supported.

-> Now that looks horribly wrong... that LUN number looks like a kernel pointer

scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
scsi 1:2:18:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
ata1.00: ATAPI: IBM     RMBO0040532, SA61, max UDMA/100
ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (device reports invalid type, err_mask=0x0)
ata1.00: revalidation failed (errno=-22)
ata1.00: disabled

-> So SATA works "better" with the patch but doesn't actually work properly :-)

scsi_alloc_sdev: Allocation failure during SCSI scanning, some SCSI devices might not be configured

-> That error could give us more info... not sure what it means, we do have plenty of 
memory...
 
scsi 1:8:0:0: Enclosure         IBM      VSBPD6E4B  3GSAS   01 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2
scsi: unknown device type 31
scsi 1:255:255:255: No Device         IBM      57CB001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
work_for_cpu used greatest stack depth: 9520 bytes left
st: Version 20101219, fixed bufsize 32768, s/g segs 256
sd 0:0:4:0: [sda] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
sd 0:0:5:0: [sdb] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
sd 0:0:6:0: [sdc] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
sd 0:0:7:0: [sdd] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] READ CAPACITY failed
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Sense Key : Illegal Request [current] 
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Add. Sense: Invalid command operation code

-> Any idea what's up with that guy ?

sd 0:0:4:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0
sd 0:0:5:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
sd 0:0:5:0: Attached scsi generic sg1 type 0
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Test WP failed, assume Write Enabled
sd 0:0:6:0: Attached scsi generic sg2 type 0
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Asking for cache data failed
sd 0:0:7:0: Attached scsi generic sg3 type 0
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] READ CAPACITY failed
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Sense Key : Illegal Request [current] 
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Add. Sense: Invalid command operation code

-> And this one ?

There's more below ...

sd 0:0:18:0: Attached scsi generic sg4 type 0
sd 1:0:4:0: [sdf] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
scsi 0:2:18:0: Attached scsi generic sg5 type 13
sd 1:0:6:0: [sdh] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
scsi 0:255:255:255: Attached scsi generic sg6 type 31
scsi 0:254:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg7 type 3
sd 1:0:4:0: Attached scsi generic sg8 type 0
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Test WP failed, assume Write Enabled
sd 1:0:5:0: Attached scsi generic sg9 type 0
sd 1:0:6:0: Attached scsi generic sg10 type 0
sd 1:0:7:0: [sdi] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Asking for cache data failed
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Assuming drive cache: write through
sd 1:0:7:0: Attached scsi generic sg11 type 0
scsi 1:0:18:0: Attached scsi generic sg12 type 13
sd 0:0:4:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
sd 1:2:18:0: Attached scsi generic sg13 type 0
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] READ CAPACITY failed
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Sense Key : Illegal Request [current] 
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Add. Sense: Invalid command operation code
scsi 1:8:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg14 type 13
scsi 1:255:255:255: Attached scsi generic sg15 type 31
e1000: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - version 7.3.21-k8-NAPI
e1000: Copyright (c) 1999-2006 Intel Corporation.
e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - 1.3.10-k2
e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2011 Intel Corporation.
sd 1:0:6:0: [sdh] Write Protect is off
sd 0:0:5:0: [sdb] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Test WP failed, assume Write Enabled
sd 0:0:7:0: [sdd] Write Protect is off
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] READ CAPACITY failed
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Sense Key : Illegal Request [current] 
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Add. Sense: Invalid command operation code
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Asking for cache data failed
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through
sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Attached SCSI disk
sd 1:0:5:0: [sdg] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
sd 1:0:4:0: [sdf] Write Protect is off
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Test WP failed, assume Write Enabled
sd 0:0:6:0: [sdc] Write Protect is off
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Asking for cache data failed
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Assuming drive cache: write through
sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Attached SCSI disk
sd 0:0:7:0: [sdd] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
sd 0:0:4:0: [sda] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
sd 1:0:6:0: [sdh] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
sd 1:0:4:0: [sdf] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
sd 1:0:5:0: [sdg] Write Protect is off
sd 1:0:7:0: [sdi] Write Protect is off
sd 0:0:6:0: [sdc] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
sd 1:0:7:0: [sdi] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
sd 1:0:5:0: [sdg] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
 sdb: unknown partition table
 sdd: unknown partition table
 sdh: unknown partition table
 sdi: unknown partition table
 sdf: [AIX] unknown partition table
 sdg: unknown partition table
e1000e 0002:03:00.0: Disabling ASPM  L1
 sdc: unknown partition table
e1000e 0002:03:00.0: (unregistered net_device): Failed to initialize MSI interrupts.  Falling back to legacy interrupts.
scsi 1:254:0:0: Processor         IBM      2B4C001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
 sda: [AIX] unknown partition table
sd 0:0:5:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI disk
sd 1:0:6:0: [sdh] Attached SCSI disk
sd 1:0:7:0: [sdi] Attached SCSI disk
sd 0:0:6:0: [sdc] Attached SCSI disk
sd 1:0:5:0: [sdg] Attached SCSI disk
sd 0:0:7:0: [sdd] Attached SCSI disk
scsi 1:254:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg16 type 3
sd 1:0:4:0: [sdf] Attached SCSI disk
sd 0:0:4:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk

Cheers,
Ben.
> 
> 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Brian
> > 
> > On 06/21/2011 11:07 AM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > > Ping on this -- Tejun, Brian, Jeff, this is a pretty annoying 2.6.39
> > > regression which it would be good to have fixed in 3.0.
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nish
> > > 
> > > On 16.06.2011 [08:28:36 -0700], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > >> On 16.06.2011 [08:28:39 -0500], Brian King wrote:
> > >>> On 06/16/2011 02:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > >>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > >>>>>> That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
> > >>>>>> libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
> > >>>>>> should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
> > >>>>>> only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
> > >>>>>> is not NULL.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
> > >>>>> appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
> > >>>>> not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
> > >>>>> ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
> > >>>>> ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Maybe we can test error_handler in ata_sas_port_start()?
> > >>>
> > >>> Good point. Since libsas is converted to the new eh now, we would need to have
> > >>> this test.
> > >>
> > >> Commit 7b3a24c57d2eeda8dba9c205342b12689c4679f9 ("ahci: don't enable
> > >> port irq before handler is registered") caused a regression for CD-ROMs
> > >> attached to the IPR SATA bus on Power machines:
> > >>
> > >>   ata_port_alloc: ENTER
> > >>   ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe begin
> > >>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
> > >>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
> > >>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
> > >>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
> > >>   ata1.00: limiting speed to UDMA7:PIO5
> > >>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
> > >>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
> > >>   ata1.00: disabled
> > >>   ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe end
> > >>   scsi_alloc_sdev: Allocation failure during SCSI scanning, some SCSI devices might not be configured
> > >>
> > >> The FROZEN flag added in that commit is only cleared by the new EH code,
> > >> which is not used by ipr. Clear this flag in the SAS code if we don't
> > >> support new EH.
> > >>
> > >> Reported-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > >> index d51f979..ebe1685 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > >> @@ -3797,6 +3797,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_alloc);
> > >>   */
> > >>  int ata_sas_port_start(struct ata_port *ap)
> > >>  {
> > >> +	/*
> > >> +	 * the port is marked as frozen at allocation time, but if we don't
> > >> +	 * have new eh, we won't thaw it
> > >> +	 */
> > >> +	if (!ap->ops->error_handler)
> > >> +		ap->pflags &= ~ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN;
> > >>  	return 0;
> > >>  }
> > >>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_start);
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> -- 
> > >> Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
> > >> IBM Linux Technology Center
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 

Re: [PATCH] libata/sas: only set FROZEN flag if new EH is supported

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 14:42 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 14:31 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:30 -0500, Brian King wrote:
> > > Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?
> > 
> > BTW. Current upstream with that patch applied on a machine here leads to
> > several oddities, I don't know at this point whether any of that is
> > actually a regression :
> 
> Ooops... pressed "send" too quickly. Here's a log excerpt with some
> comments:

 .../...

Ok so most of that is already in 2.6.39, including the odd LUN, so
nothing new under the sun.

I'll do more digging / bisection...

Ben.

Re: [PATCH] libata/sas: only set FROZEN flag if new EH is supported

[Nishanth Aravamudan]

On 23.06.2011 [14:42:00 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 14:31 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:30 -0500, Brian King wrote:
> > > Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?
> > 
> > BTW. Current upstream with that patch applied on a machine here leads to
> > several oddities, I don't know at this point whether any of that is
> > actually a regression :
> 
> Ooops... pressed "send" too quickly. Here's a log excerpt with some
> comments:

Hrm, I didn't see any of this on my box, which I thought was the same as
yours :)

> ipr: IBM Power RAID SCSI Device Driver version: 2.5.2 (April 27, 2011)
> ipr 0000:04:00.0: Found IOA with IRQ: 129
> ipr 0000:04:00.0: Initializing IOA.
> ipr 0000:04:00.0: Starting IOA initialization sequence.
> ipr 0000:04:00.0: Adapter firmware version: 04220029
> ipr 0000:04:00.0: IOA initialized.
> scsi0 : IBM 2B4C Storage Adapter
> scsi 0:0:4:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
> scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
> 
> -> Are these odd INQUIRY results expected ?
> 
> scsi 0:0:5:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
> scsi 0:0:6:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
> scsi 0:0:7:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
> scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
> scsi 0:0:18:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
> scsi 0:2:18:0: Enclosure         IBM      PSBPD6E4A  3GSAS 0109 PQ: 0 ANSI: 4
> scsi: unknown device type 31
> scsi 0:255:255:255: No Device         IBM      2B4C001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
> 
> -> The above looks odd, not sure what it means

The "unknown device type"? I see it all the time on lots of different
machines.

> ipr 0000:05:00.0: Found IOA with IRQ: 130
> ipr 0000:05:00.0: Initializing IOA.
> scsi 0:254:0:0: Processor         IBM      57CB001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
> ipr 0000:05:00.0: Starting IOA initialization sequence.
> ipr 0000:05:00.0: Adapter firmware version: 04220029
> ipr 0000:05:00.0: IOA initialized.
> scsi1 : IBM 57CB Storage Adapter
> scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
> scsi 1:0:4:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
> scsi 1:0:5:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
> scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
> scsi 1:0:6:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
> scsi 1:0:7:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
> scsi 1:0:18:0: Enclosure         IBM      PSBPD6E4A  3GSAS 0109 PQ: 0 ANSI: 4
> scsi: On host 1 channel 0 id 18 only 511 (max_scsi_report_luns) of 402653184 luns reported, try increasing max_scsi_report_luns.
> scsi: host 1 channel 0 id 18 lun 0xc0000007f01e810f has a LUN larger than currently supported.
> 
> -> Now that looks horribly wrong... that LUN number looks like a kernel pointer

Yeah, that's weird.

> scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
> scsi 1:2:18:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
> ata1.00: ATAPI: IBM     RMBO0040532, SA61, max UDMA/100
> ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (device reports invalid type, err_mask=0x0)
> ata1.00: revalidation failed (errno=-22)
> ata1.00: disabled
> 
> -> So SATA works "better" with the patch but doesn't actually work properly :-)
> 
> scsi_alloc_sdev: Allocation failure during SCSI scanning, some SCSI devices might not be configured
> 
> -> That error could give us more info... not sure what it means, we do have plenty of 
> memory...

That message is sort of strange. It's not necessarily referring to
memory allocation failing, but the port allocation failing in the SCSI
code. And that just means an error, like the failed to IDENTIFY above,
is occurring in the allocation path. It *can* also mean memory
allocation failure, I think, just not in this case.

I don't know much about the following errors, though, sorry.

-Nish

> scsi 1:8:0:0: Enclosure         IBM      VSBPD6E4B  3GSAS   01 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2
> scsi: unknown device type 31
> scsi 1:255:255:255: No Device         IBM      57CB001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
> work_for_cpu used greatest stack depth: 9520 bytes left
> st: Version 20101219, fixed bufsize 32768, s/g segs 256
> sd 0:0:4:0: [sda] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
> sd 0:0:5:0: [sdb] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
> sd 0:0:6:0: [sdc] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
> sd 0:0:7:0: [sdd] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] READ CAPACITY failed
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Sense Key : Illegal Request [current] 
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Add. Sense: Invalid command operation code
> 
> -> Any idea what's up with that guy ?
> 
> sd 0:0:4:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0
> sd 0:0:5:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
> sd 0:0:5:0: Attached scsi generic sg1 type 0
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Test WP failed, assume Write Enabled
> sd 0:0:6:0: Attached scsi generic sg2 type 0
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Asking for cache data failed
> sd 0:0:7:0: Attached scsi generic sg3 type 0
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] READ CAPACITY failed
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Sense Key : Illegal Request [current] 
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Add. Sense: Invalid command operation code
> 
> -> And this one ?
> 
> There's more below ...
> 
> sd 0:0:18:0: Attached scsi generic sg4 type 0
> sd 1:0:4:0: [sdf] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
> scsi 0:2:18:0: Attached scsi generic sg5 type 13
> sd 1:0:6:0: [sdh] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
> scsi 0:255:255:255: Attached scsi generic sg6 type 31
> scsi 0:254:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg7 type 3
> sd 1:0:4:0: Attached scsi generic sg8 type 0
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Test WP failed, assume Write Enabled
> sd 1:0:5:0: Attached scsi generic sg9 type 0
> sd 1:0:6:0: Attached scsi generic sg10 type 0
> sd 1:0:7:0: [sdi] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Asking for cache data failed
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Assuming drive cache: write through
> sd 1:0:7:0: Attached scsi generic sg11 type 0
> scsi 1:0:18:0: Attached scsi generic sg12 type 13
> sd 0:0:4:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
> sd 1:2:18:0: Attached scsi generic sg13 type 0
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] READ CAPACITY failed
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Sense Key : Illegal Request [current] 
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Add. Sense: Invalid command operation code
> scsi 1:8:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg14 type 13
> scsi 1:255:255:255: Attached scsi generic sg15 type 31
> e1000: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - version 7.3.21-k8-NAPI
> e1000: Copyright (c) 1999-2006 Intel Corporation.
> e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - 1.3.10-k2
> e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2011 Intel Corporation.
> sd 1:0:6:0: [sdh] Write Protect is off
> sd 0:0:5:0: [sdb] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Test WP failed, assume Write Enabled
> sd 0:0:7:0: [sdd] Write Protect is off
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] READ CAPACITY failed
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Sense Key : Illegal Request [current] 
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Add. Sense: Invalid command operation code
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Asking for cache data failed
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through
> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Attached SCSI disk
> sd 1:0:5:0: [sdg] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
> sd 1:0:4:0: [sdf] Write Protect is off
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Test WP failed, assume Write Enabled
> sd 0:0:6:0: [sdc] Write Protect is off
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Asking for cache data failed
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Assuming drive cache: write through
> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] Attached SCSI disk
> sd 0:0:7:0: [sdd] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
> sd 0:0:4:0: [sda] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
> sd 1:0:6:0: [sdh] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
> sd 1:0:4:0: [sdf] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
> sd 1:0:5:0: [sdg] Write Protect is off
> sd 1:0:7:0: [sdi] Write Protect is off
> sd 0:0:6:0: [sdc] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
> sd 1:0:7:0: [sdi] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
> sd 1:0:5:0: [sdg] Write cache: disabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
>  sdb: unknown partition table
>  sdd: unknown partition table
>  sdh: unknown partition table
>  sdi: unknown partition table
>  sdf: [AIX] unknown partition table
>  sdg: unknown partition table
> e1000e 0002:03:00.0: Disabling ASPM  L1
>  sdc: unknown partition table
> e1000e 0002:03:00.0: (unregistered net_device): Failed to initialize MSI interrupts.  Falling back to legacy interrupts.
> scsi 1:254:0:0: Processor         IBM      2B4C001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
>  sda: [AIX] unknown partition table
> sd 0:0:5:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI disk
> sd 1:0:6:0: [sdh] Attached SCSI disk
> sd 1:0:7:0: [sdi] Attached SCSI disk
> sd 0:0:6:0: [sdc] Attached SCSI disk
> sd 1:0:5:0: [sdg] Attached SCSI disk
> sd 0:0:7:0: [sdd] Attached SCSI disk
> scsi 1:254:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg16 type 3
> sd 1:0:4:0: [sdf] Attached SCSI disk
> sd 0:0:4:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk
> 
> Cheers,
> Ben.
> > 
> > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > Brian
> > > 
> > > On 06/21/2011 11:07 AM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > > > Ping on this -- Tejun, Brian, Jeff, this is a pretty annoying 2.6.39
> > > > regression which it would be good to have fixed in 3.0.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Nish
> > > > 
> > > > On 16.06.2011 [08:28:36 -0700], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > > >> On 16.06.2011 [08:28:39 -0500], Brian King wrote:
> > > >>> On 06/16/2011 02:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > >>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > > >>>>>> That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
> > > >>>>>> libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so this flag
> > > >>>>>> should really never get set. The alternate way to fix this would be to
> > > >>>>>> only set ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN in ata_port_alloc if ap->ops->error_handler
> > > >>>>>> is not NULL.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> It seemed like ipr is as you say, but I wasn't sure if it was
> > > >>>>> appropriate to make the change above in the common libata-scis code or
> > > >>>>> not. I don't want to break some other device on accident.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Also, I tried your suggestion, but I don't think that can happen in
> > > >>>>> ata_port_alloc? ata_port_alloc is allocated ap itself, and it seems like
> > > >>>>> ap->ops typically gets set only after ata_port_alloc returns?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Maybe we can test error_handler in ata_sas_port_start()?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Good point. Since libsas is converted to the new eh now, we would need to have
> > > >>> this test.
> > > >>
> > > >> Commit 7b3a24c57d2eeda8dba9c205342b12689c4679f9 ("ahci: don't enable
> > > >> port irq before handler is registered") caused a regression for CD-ROMs
> > > >> attached to the IPR SATA bus on Power machines:
> > > >>
> > > >>   ata_port_alloc: ENTER
> > > >>   ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe begin
> > > >>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
> > > >>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
> > > >>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
> > > >>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
> > > >>   ata1.00: limiting speed to UDMA7:PIO5
> > > >>   ata1.00: ata_dev_read_id: ENTER
> > > >>   ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x40)
> > > >>   ata1.00: disabled
> > > >>   ata_port_probe: ata1: bus probe end
> > > >>   scsi_alloc_sdev: Allocation failure during SCSI scanning, some SCSI devices might not be configured
> > > >>
> > > >> The FROZEN flag added in that commit is only cleared by the new EH code,
> > > >> which is not used by ipr. Clear this flag in the SAS code if we don't
> > > >> support new EH.
> > > >>
> > > >> Reported-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> > > >> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
> > > >>
> > > >> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > > >> index d51f979..ebe1685 100644
> > > >> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > > >> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > > >> @@ -3797,6 +3797,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_alloc);
> > > >>   */
> > > >>  int ata_sas_port_start(struct ata_port *ap)
> > > >>  {
> > > >> +	/*
> > > >> +	 * the port is marked as frozen at allocation time, but if we don't
> > > >> +	 * have new eh, we won't thaw it
> > > >> +	 */
> > > >> +	if (!ap->ops->error_handler)
> > > >> +		ap->pflags &= ~ATA_PFLAG_FROZEN;
> > > >>  	return 0;
> > > >>  }
> > > >>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_port_start);
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> -- 
> > > >> Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
> > > >> IBM Linux Technology Center
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> 

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

Re: [PATCH] libata/sas: only set FROZEN flag if new EH is supported

[Brian King]

On 06/23/2011 12:15 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 23.06.2011 [14:42:00 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 14:31 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:30 -0500, Brian King wrote:
>>>> Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?
>>>
>>> BTW. Current upstream with that patch applied on a machine here leads to
>>> several oddities, I don't know at this point whether any of that is
>>> actually a regression :
>>
>> Ooops... pressed "send" too quickly. Here's a log excerpt with some
>> comments:
> 
> Hrm, I didn't see any of this on my box, which I thought was the same as
> yours :)
> 
>> ipr: IBM Power RAID SCSI Device Driver version: 2.5.2 (April 27, 2011)
>> ipr 0000:04:00.0: Found IOA with IRQ: 129
>> ipr 0000:04:00.0: Initializing IOA.
>> ipr 0000:04:00.0: Starting IOA initialization sequence.
>> ipr 0000:04:00.0: Adapter firmware version: 04220029
>> ipr 0000:04:00.0: IOA initialized.
>> scsi0 : IBM 2B4C Storage Adapter
>> scsi 0:0:4:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
>> scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
>>
>> -> Are these odd INQUIRY results expected ?

Looking at the log, my guess is that we are dealing with a zero buffer. If we were
to get an all zero buffer on the Inquiry, we would think it was a Direct-Access
device with an inquiry response buffer of 5 bytes in length.

>> scsi 0:0:5:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
>> scsi 0:0:6:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
>> scsi 0:0:7:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
>> scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
>> scsi 0:0:18:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0

I'm guessing this should really be an Enclosure device here rather than a disk,
which would be symptomatic of the all zero inquiry buffer.

>> scsi 0:2:18:0: Enclosure         IBM      PSBPD6E4A  3GSAS 0109 PQ: 0 ANSI: 4
>> scsi: unknown device type 31
>> scsi 0:255:255:255: No Device         IBM      2B4C001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
>>
>> -> The above looks odd, not sure what it means
> 
> The "unknown device type"? I see it all the time on lots of different
> machines.

That is normal and expected on an ipr adapter. The unknown device seen on every ipr
adapter at SCSI bus/target/lun 255:255:255 is the adapter itself. It is used by
the RAID management tools in Linux to do things like RAID configuration via SG_IO.

> 
>> ipr 0000:05:00.0: Found IOA with IRQ: 130
>> ipr 0000:05:00.0: Initializing IOA.
>> scsi 0:254:0:0: Processor         IBM      57CB001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
>> ipr 0000:05:00.0: Starting IOA initialization sequence.
>> ipr 0000:05:00.0: Adapter firmware version: 04220029
>> ipr 0000:05:00.0: IOA initialized.
>> scsi1 : IBM 57CB Storage Adapter
>> scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
>> scsi 1:0:4:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
>> scsi 1:0:5:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
>> scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
>> scsi 1:0:6:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
>> scsi 1:0:7:0: Direct-Access     IBM      ST9300603SS      BB09 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
>> scsi 1:0:18:0: Enclosure         IBM      PSBPD6E4A  3GSAS 0109 PQ: 0 ANSI: 4
>> scsi: On host 1 channel 0 id 18 only 511 (max_scsi_report_luns) of 402653184 luns reported, try increasing max_scsi_report_luns.
>> scsi: host 1 channel 0 id 18 lun 0xc0000007f01e810f has a LUN larger than currently supported.
>>
>> -> Now that looks horribly wrong... that LUN number looks like a kernel pointer
> 
> Yeah, that's weird.
> 
>> scsi scan: INQUIRY result too short (5), using 36
>> scsi 1:2:18:0: Direct-Access                                    PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
>> ata1.00: ATAPI: IBM     RMBO0040532, SA61, max UDMA/100
>> ata1.00: failed to IDENTIFY (device reports invalid type, err_mask=0x0)
>> ata1.00: revalidation failed (errno=-22)
>> ata1.00: disabled
>>
>> -> So SATA works "better" with the patch but doesn't actually work properly :-)
>>
>> scsi_alloc_sdev: Allocation failure during SCSI scanning, some SCSI devices might not be configured
>>
>> -> That error could give us more info... not sure what it means, we do have plenty of 
>> memory...
> 
> That message is sort of strange. It's not necessarily referring to
> memory allocation failing, but the port allocation failing in the SCSI
> code. And that just means an error, like the failed to IDENTIFY above,
> is occurring in the allocation path. It *can* also mean memory
> allocation failure, I think, just not in this case.
> 
> I don't know much about the following errors, though, sorry.
> 
> -Nish
> 
>> scsi 1:8:0:0: Enclosure         IBM      VSBPD6E4B  3GSAS   01 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2
>> scsi: unknown device type 31
>> scsi 1:255:255:255: No Device         IBM      57CB001SISIOA    0150 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
>> work_for_cpu used greatest stack depth: 9520 bytes left
>> st: Version 20101219, fixed bufsize 32768, s/g segs 256
>> sd 0:0:4:0: [sda] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
>> sd 0:0:5:0: [sdb] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
>> sd 0:0:6:0: [sdc] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
>> sd 0:0:7:0: [sdd] 585937500 512-byte logical blocks: (300 GB/279 GiB)
>> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] READ CAPACITY failed
>> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
>> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Sense Key : Illegal Request [current] 
>> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde]  Add. Sense: Invalid command operation code
>>
>> -> Any idea what's up with that guy ?

If this guy is really an enclosure, this is the response you would get
on a Read Capacity.

>>
>> sd 0:0:4:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0
>> sd 0:0:5:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
>> sd 0:0:5:0: Attached scsi generic sg1 type 0
>> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Test WP failed, assume Write Enabled
>> sd 0:0:6:0: Attached scsi generic sg2 type 0
>> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Asking for cache data failed
>> sd 0:0:7:0: Attached scsi generic sg3 type 0
>> sd 0:0:18:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through
>> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj] READ CAPACITY failed
>> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
>> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Sense Key : Illegal Request [current] 
>> sd 1:2:18:0: [sdj]  Add. Sense: Invalid command operation code
>>
>> -> And this one ?

Same here.

When did this last work on this system? It seems like this is completely
separate from the libata issue.

-Brian

-- 
Brian King
Linux on Power Virtualization
IBM Linux Technology Center

Re: [PATCH] libata/sas: only set FROZEN flag if new EH is supported

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 15:05 -0500, Brian King wrote:
> 
> Same here.
> 
> When did this last work on this system? It seems like this is
> completely
> separate from the libata issue. 

It's separate. See my other internal message. This is a BML system and
it's broken as far as 2.6.36 but the BML "patched" kernel works,
anyways, moving that off list for now.

Cheers,
Ben.