From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 408F7C2D0DB for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 18:15:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1276922522 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 18:15:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1580235317; bh=dYG3LXwor/67vMcViqXYCwPbnJDeCucY5iwlCPtL8P8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=XT5SaUKuIMLUl1Zr6bHeo6mmtq4u7fQ9zP7EDVDh5zK2Y2Brdy6AmLQORTk66p2z+ 6qXNxF/OhS18QkhazsV3hWE9kLm7vPV8oejyidlxWy8XbBYjTcusDNZxrS4vkO03eX 54p3PP+lkNozyngALh3PKkMEDSjsv7IFG0AbrFDQ= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726699AbgA1SPQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jan 2020 13:15:16 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:49640 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726620AbgA1SPQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jan 2020 13:15:16 -0500 Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1FD05214AF; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 18:15:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1580235315; bh=dYG3LXwor/67vMcViqXYCwPbnJDeCucY5iwlCPtL8P8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=yxxhWwAaXa1D7g9EE+1i5rniPf7gawzu4autS+7W6oWOLCxckWMSAhZHgZh4RV+XY GOzdMpgU2rawM26hqpci+TTHBrlsuX0QwenLzZE3x/K/+KwZx30YOeYAJwkroc3cNd zyuUWiSx8SJJLd5kDluYwLl27fnI81VfxOue929I= Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2020 19:15:13 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Pavel Machek Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Damien Le Moal , Masato Suzuki , "Martin K. Petersen" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 59/92] sd: Fix REQ_OP_ZONE_REPORT completion handling Message-ID: <20200128181513.GC3673744@kroah.com> References: <20200128135809.344954797@linuxfoundation.org> <20200128135816.802992447@linuxfoundation.org> <20200128180231.GA11577@amd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200128180231.GA11577@amd> Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 07:02:31PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > From: Masato Suzuki > > > > > > > ZBC/ZAC report zones command may return less bytes than requested if the > > number of matching zones for the report request is small. However, unlike > > read or write commands, the remainder of incomplete report zones commands > > cannot be automatically requested by the block layer: the start sector of > > the next report cannot be known, and the report reply may not be 512B > > aligned for SAS drives (a report zone reply size is always a multiple of > > 64B). The regular request completion code executing bio_advance() and > > restart of the command remainder part currently causes invalid zone > > descriptor data to be reported to the caller if the report zone size is > > smaller than 512B (a case that can happen easily for a report of the last > > zones of a SAS drive for example). > > What is the story here? Mainline does not seem to have this patch, so > this is not the case of "upstream commit xxx" line simply missing. If > the same bug is fixed in mainline different way, it would be nice to > point to that commit.. Yes, this is not needed in 5.4 as it was rewritten differently there. thanks, greg k-h