Re: [PATCH Linux 2.6.12-rc5-mm2 07/09] blk: update libata to use the new blk_ordered.

Tejun Heo
2005-06-07T02:11:57Z

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
>
>> 07_blk_update_libata_to_use_new_ordered.patch
>>
>> Reflect changes in SCSI midlayer and updated to use the new
>> ordered request implementation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
>
>
> I would prefer separate patches for:
>
> * implement support for FUA bit in libata SCSI simulator
>
> * update libata for your ordered flush changes
>

Sure.

>
>
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/ahci.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/ahci.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/ahci.c 2005-06-05 14:53:35.000000000 +0900
>> @@ -203,7 +203,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template ahci_sht = {
>> .dma_boundary = AHCI_DMA_BOUNDARY,
>> .slave_configure = ata_scsi_slave_config,
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>> static struct ata_port_operations ahci_ops = {
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/ata_piix.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/ata_piix.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/ata_piix.c 2005-06-05 14:53:35.000000000
>> +0900
>> @@ -123,7 +123,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template piix_sht = {
>> .dma_boundary = ATA_DMA_BOUNDARY,
>> .slave_configure = ata_scsi_slave_config,
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>> static struct ata_port_operations piix_pata_ops = {
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_nv.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/sata_nv.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_nv.c 2005-06-05 14:53:35.000000000
>> +0900
>> @@ -206,7 +206,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template nv_sht = {
>> .dma_boundary = ATA_DMA_BOUNDARY,
>> .slave_configure = ata_scsi_slave_config,
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>> static struct ata_port_operations nv_ops = {
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_promise.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/sata_promise.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_promise.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:53:35.000000000 +0900
>> @@ -104,7 +104,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template pdc_ata_sht =
>> .dma_boundary = ATA_DMA_BOUNDARY,
>> .slave_configure = ata_scsi_slave_config,
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>> static struct ata_port_operations pdc_ata_ops = {
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_sil.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/sata_sil.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_sil.c 2005-06-05 14:53:35.000000000
>> +0900
>> @@ -135,7 +135,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template sil_sht = {
>> .dma_boundary = ATA_DMA_BOUNDARY,
>> .slave_configure = ata_scsi_slave_config,
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>> static struct ata_port_operations sil_ops = {
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_sis.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/sata_sis.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_sis.c 2005-06-05 14:53:35.000000000
>> +0900
>> @@ -90,7 +90,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template sis_sht = {
>> .dma_boundary = ATA_DMA_BOUNDARY,
>> .slave_configure = ata_scsi_slave_config,
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>> static struct ata_port_operations sis_ops = {
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_svw.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/sata_svw.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_svw.c 2005-06-05 14:53:35.000000000
>> +0900
>> @@ -288,7 +288,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template k2_sata_sht =
>> .proc_info = k2_sata_proc_info,
>> #endif
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>>
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_sx4.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/sata_sx4.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_sx4.c 2005-06-05 14:53:35.000000000
>> +0900
>> @@ -188,7 +188,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template pdc_sata_sht =
>> .dma_boundary = ATA_DMA_BOUNDARY,
>> .slave_configure = ata_scsi_slave_config,
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>> static struct ata_port_operations pdc_20621_ops = {
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_uli.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/sata_uli.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_uli.c 2005-06-05 14:53:35.000000000
>> +0900
>> @@ -82,7 +82,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template uli_sht = {
>> .dma_boundary = ATA_DMA_BOUNDARY,
>> .slave_configure = ata_scsi_slave_config,
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>> static struct ata_port_operations uli_ops = {
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_via.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/sata_via.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_via.c 2005-06-05 14:53:35.000000000
>> +0900
>> @@ -102,7 +102,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template svia_sht = {
>> .dma_boundary = ATA_DMA_BOUNDARY,
>> .slave_configure = ata_scsi_slave_config,
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>> static struct ata_port_operations svia_sata_ops = {
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_vsc.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/sata_vsc.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/sata_vsc.c 2005-06-05 14:53:35.000000000
>> +0900
>> @@ -206,7 +206,6 @@ static Scsi_Host_Template vsc_sata_sht =
>> .dma_boundary = ATA_DMA_BOUNDARY,
>> .slave_configure = ata_scsi_slave_config,
>> .bios_param = ata_std_bios_param,
>> - .ordered_flush = 1,
>> };
>>
>>
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/libata-core.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/libata-core.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/libata-core.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:53:35.000000000 +0900
>> @@ -510,19 +510,21 @@ void ata_tf_from_fis(u8 *fis, struct ata
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> - * ata_prot_to_cmd - determine which read/write opcodes to use
>> + * ata_prot_to_cmd - determine which read/write/fua-write opcodes
>> to use
>> * @protocol: ATA_PROT_xxx taskfile protocol
>> * @lba48: true is lba48 is present
>> *
>> - * Given necessary input, determine which read/write commands
>> - * to use to transfer data.
>> + * Given necessary input, determine which read/write/fua-write
>> + * commands to use to transfer data. Note that we only support
>> + * fua-writes on DMA LBA48 protocol. In other cases, we simply
>> + * return 0 which is NOP.
>> *
>> * LOCKING:
>> * None.
>> */
>> static int ata_prot_to_cmd(int protocol, int lba48)
>> {
>> - int rcmd = 0, wcmd = 0;
>> + int rcmd = 0, wcmd = 0, wfua = 0;
>>
>> switch (protocol) {
>> case ATA_PROT_PIO:
>> @@ -539,6 +541,7 @@ static int ata_prot_to_cmd(int protocol,
>> if (lba48) {
>> rcmd = ATA_CMD_READ_EXT;
>> wcmd = ATA_CMD_WRITE_EXT;
>> + wfua = ATA_CMD_WRITE_FUA_EXT;
>> } else {
>> rcmd = ATA_CMD_READ;
>> wcmd = ATA_CMD_WRITE;
>> @@ -549,7 +552,7 @@ static int ata_prot_to_cmd(int protocol,
>> return -1;
>> }
>>
>> - return rcmd | (wcmd << 8);
>> + return rcmd | (wcmd << 8) | (wfua << 16);
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> @@ -582,6 +585,7 @@ static void ata_dev_set_protocol(struct
>> dev->read_cmd = cmd & 0xff;
>> dev->write_cmd = (cmd >> 8) & 0xff;
>> + dev->write_fua_cmd = (cmd >> 16) & 0xff;
>> }
>>
>> static const char * xfer_mode_str[] = {
>> Index: blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- blk-fixes.orig/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:50:11.000000000 +0900
>> +++ blk-fixes/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c 2005-06-05
>> 14:53:35.000000000 +0900
>> @@ -569,6 +569,7 @@ static unsigned int ata_scsi_rw_xlat(str
>> struct ata_device *dev = qc->dev;
>> unsigned int lba = tf->flags & ATA_TFLAG_LBA;
>> unsigned int lba48 = tf->flags & ATA_TFLAG_LBA48;
>> + int fua = scsicmd[1] & 0x8;
>> u64 block = 0;
>> u32 n_block = 0;
>>
>> @@ -577,9 +578,26 @@ static unsigned int ata_scsi_rw_xlat(str
>>
>> if (scsicmd[0] == READ_10 || scsicmd[0] == READ_6 ||
>> scsicmd[0] == READ_16) {
>> + if (fua) {
>> + printk(KERN_WARNING
>> + "ata%u(%u): WARNING: FUA READ unsupported\n",
>> + qc->ap->id, qc->dev->devno);
>> + return 1;
>> + }
>> tf->command = qc->dev->read_cmd;
>> } else {
>> - tf->command = qc->dev->write_cmd;
>> + if (fua) {
>> + if (qc->dev->write_fua_cmd == 0 || !lba48) {
>> + printk(KERN_WARNING
>> + "ata%u(%u): WARNING: FUA WRITE "
>> + "unsupported with the current "
>> + "protocol/addressing\n",
>> + qc->ap->id, qc->dev->devno);
>> + return 1;
>> + }
>> + tf->command = qc->dev->write_fua_cmd;
>> + } else
>> + tf->command = qc->dev->write_cmd;
>> tf->flags |= ATA_TFLAG_WRITE;
>> }
>>
>
>
> this all seems fine.
>
>
>> @@ -1205,10 +1223,12 @@ unsigned int ata_scsiop_mode_sense(struc
>> if (six_byte) {
>> output_len--;
>> rbuf[0] = output_len;
>> + rbuf[2] |= ata_id_has_fua(args->id) ? 0x10 : 0;
>> } else {
>> output_len -= 2;
>> rbuf[0] = output_len >> 8;
>> rbuf[1] = output_len;
>> + rbuf[3] |= ata_id_has_fua(args->id) ? 0x10 : 0;
>> }
>
>
> I wonder what a SCSI person thinks about this. Its defined as 'DPO and
> FUA' not just 'FUA'.
>

As DPO is sort of optimization flag, it doesn't make user-visible
differences other than in performance. I think we can add DPO check
when translating commands and abort it w/ ILLEGAL_REQUEST (thus we'll be
lying about DPO part of the flag but not be lying that DPO operation
succeeds.) But it doesn't make any user-visible difference and we're
not using DPO in anywhere right now, so I think it's an overkill.

Any better ideas? Maybe adding another flag to scsi_device structure
like ->fua_supported which can be adjusted by slave_config?

> Also, a bit of style: please use "1 << n" for bit constants in libata.
>
> Jeff
>

Sure.

Thank you.

--
tejun