Linux kernel -stable discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Peter Wang (王信友)" <peter.wang@mediatek.com>
To: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"bvanassche@acm.org" <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	"avri.altman@wdc.com" <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
	"jejb@linux.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
	"alim.akhtar@samsung.com" <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: "linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	"Jiajie Hao (郝加节)" <jiajie.hao@mediatek.com>,
	"CC Chou (周志杰)" <cc.chou@mediatek.com>,
	"Eddie Huang (黃智傑)" <eddie.huang@mediatek.com>,
	"Alice Chao (趙珮均)" <Alice.Chao@mediatek.com>,
	"quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com" <quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com>,
	wsd_upstream <wsd_upstream@mediatek.com>,
	"Ed Tsai (蔡宗軒)" <Ed.Tsai@mediatek.com>,
	"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Lin Gui (桂林)" <Lin.Gui@mediatek.com>,
	"Chun-Hung Wu (巫駿宏)" <Chun-hung.Wu@mediatek.com>,
	"Tun-yu Yu (游敦聿)" <Tun-yu.Yu@mediatek.com>,
	"Chaotian Jing (井朝天)" <Chaotian.Jing@mediatek.com>,
	"Powen Kao (高伯文)" <Powen.Kao@mediatek.com>,
	"Naomi Chu (朱詠田)" <Naomi.Chu@mediatek.com>,
	"Qilin Tan (谭麒麟)" <Qilin.Tan@mediatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] ufs: core: requeue aborted request
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 12:16:16 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f350a1dee5a03347b5e88b9d7249223ce7b72c08.camel@mediatek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <78c7fc74-81c2-40e4-b050-1d65dec96d0a@acm.org>

On Wed, 2024-09-18 at 11:29 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>  	 
> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
> you have verified the sender or the content.
>  On 9/18/24 6:29 AM, Peter Wang (王信友) wrote:
> > Basically, this patch currently only needs to handle requeueing
> > for the error handler abort.
> > The approach for DBR mode and MCQ mode should be consistent.
> > If receive an interrupt response (OCS:ABORTED or
> INVALID_OCS_VALUE),
> > then set DID_REQUEUE. If there is no interrupt, it will also set
> > SCSI DID_REQUEUE in ufshcd_err_handler through
> > ufshcd_complete_requests
> > with force_compl = true.
> 
> Reporting a completion for commands cleared by writing into the
> legacy
> UTRLCLR register is not compliant with any version of the UFSHCI
> standard. Reporting a completion for commands cleared by writing into
> that register is problematic because it causes
> ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd()
> to be called as follows:
> 
> ufshcd_sl_intr()
>    ufshcd_transfer_req_compl()
>      ufshcd_poll()
>        __ufshcd_transfer_req_compl()
>          ufshcd_compl_one_cqe()
>            cmd->result = ...
>            ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd()
>            scsi_done()
> 
> Calling ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd() if a command has been cleared is
> problematic because the SCSI core does not expect this. If 
> ufshcd_try_to_abort_task() clears a SCSI command, 
> ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd() must not be called until the SCSI core
> decides to release the command. This is why I wrote in a previous
> mail
> that I think that a quirk should be introduced to suppress the
> completions generated by clearing a SCSI command.
> 

Hi Bart,

I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding your point, but I feel that
ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd should always be called. It's scsi_done 
that shouldn't be called, as it should be left to the SCSI layer 
to decide how to handle this command. 
Because ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd is just about releasing resources 
related to ufshcd_map_sg and the clock at the UFS driver level. 
scsi_done is what notifies the SCSI layer that the cmd has finished, 
asking it to look at the result to decide how to proceed.


> > The more problematic part is with MCQ mode. To imitate the DBR
> > approach, we just need to set DID_REQUEUE upon receiving an
> interrupt.
> > Everything else remains the same. This would make things simpler.
> > 
> > Moving forward, if we want to simplify things and we have also
> > taken stock of the two or three scenarios where OCS: ABORTED
> occurs,
> > do we even need a flag? Couldn't we just set DID_REQUEUE directly
> > for OCS: ABORTED?
> > What do you think?
> 
> How about making ufshcd_compl_one_cqe() skip entries with status
> OCS_ABORTED? That would make ufshcd_compl_one_cqe() behave as the
> SCSI core expects, namely not freeing any command resources if a
> SCSI command is aborted successfully.
> 
> This approach may require further changes to ufshcd_abort_all().
> In that function there are separate code paths for legacy and MCQ
> mode. This is less than ideal. Would it be possible to combine
> these code paths by removing the ufshcd_complete_requests() call
> from ufshcd_abort_all() and by handling completions from inside
> ufshcd_abort_one()?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.

The four case flows for abort are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------

Case1: DBR ufshcd_abort

In this case, you can see that ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd will 
definitely be called.

ufshcd_abort()
  ufshcd_try_to_abort_task()		// It should trigger an
interrupt, but the tensor might not
  get outstanding_lock
  clear outstanding_reqs tag
  ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd()
  release outstanding_lock

ufshcd_intr()
  ufshcd_sl_intr()
    ufshcd_transfer_req_compl()
      ufshcd_poll()
        get outstanding_lock
        clear outstanding_reqs tag
        release outstanding_lock			
        __ufshcd_transfer_req_compl()
          ufshcd_compl_one_cqe()
          cmd->result = DID_REQUEUE	// mediatek may need quirk
change DID_ABORT to DID_REQUEUE
          ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd()
          scsi_done();

In most cases, ufshcd_intr will not reach scsi_done because the 
outstanding_reqs tag is cleared by the original thread. 
Therefore, whether there is an interrupt or not doesn't affect 
the result because the ISR will do nothing in most cases. 

In a very low chance, the ISR will reach scsi_done and notify 
SCSI to requeue, and the original thread will not 
call ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd.
MediaTek may need to change DID_ABORT to DID_REQUEUE in this 
situation, or perhaps not handle this ISR at all.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Case2: MCQ ufshcd_abort

In the case of MCQ ufshcd_abort, you can also see that 
ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd will definitely be called too. 
However, there seems to be a problem here, as 
ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd might be called twice. 
This is because cmd is not null in ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd, 
which the previous version would set cmd to null. 
Skipping OCS: ABORTED in ufshcd_compl_one_cqe indeed 
can avoid this problem. This part needs further 
consideration on how to handle it.

ufshcd_abort()
  ufshcd_mcq_abort()
    ufshcd_try_to_abort_task()	// will trigger ISR 
    ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd()

ufs_mtk_mcq_intr()
  ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock()
    ufshcd_mcq_process_cqe()
      ufshcd_compl_one_cqe()
        cmd->result = DID_ABORT
        ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd() // will release twice
        scsi_done()

----------------------------------------------------------------

Case3: DBR ufshcd_err_handler

In the case of the DBR mode error handler, it's the same; 
ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd will also be executed, and scsi_done 
will definitely be used to notify SCSI to requeue.

ufshcd_err_handler()
  ufshcd_abort_all()
    ufshcd_abort_one()
      ufshcd_try_to_abort_task()	// It should trigger an
interrupt, but the tensor might not
    ufshcd_complete_requests()
      ufshcd_transfer_req_compl()
        ufshcd_poll()
          get outstanding_lock
          clear outstanding_reqs tag
          release outstanding_lock	
          __ufshcd_transfer_req_compl()
            ufshcd_compl_one_cqe()
              cmd->result = DID_REQUEUE // mediatek may need quirk
change DID_ABORT to DID_REQUEUE
              ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd()
              scsi_done()

ufshcd_intr()
  ufshcd_sl_intr()
    ufshcd_transfer_req_compl()
      ufshcd_poll()
        get outstanding_lock
        clear outstanding_reqs tag
        release outstanding_lock			
        __ufshcd_transfer_req_compl()
          ufshcd_compl_one_cqe()
          cmd->result = DID_REQUEUE // mediatek may need quirk change
DID_ABORT to DID_REQUEUE
          ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd()
          scsi_done();

At this time, the same actions are taken regardless of whether 
there is an ISR, and with the protection of outstanding_lock, 
only one thread will execute ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd and scsi_done.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Case4: MCQ ufshcd_err_handler

It's the same with MCQ mode; there is protection from the cqe lock, 
so only one thread will execute. What my patch 2 aims to do is to 
change DID_ABORT to DID_REQUEUE in this situation.

ufshcd_err_handler()
  ufshcd_abort_all()
    ufshcd_abort_one()
      ufshcd_try_to_abort_task()	// will trigger irq thread
    ufshcd_complete_requests()
      ufshcd_mcq_compl_pending_transfer()
        ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock()
          ufshcd_mcq_process_cqe()
            ufshcd_compl_one_cqe()
              cmd->result = DID_ABORT // should change to DID_REQUEUE
              ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd()
              scsi_done()

ufs_mtk_mcq_intr()
  ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock()
    ufshcd_mcq_process_cqe()
      ufshcd_compl_one_cqe()
        cmd->result = DID_ABORT  // should change to DID_REQUEUE
        ufshcd_release_scsi_cmd()
        scsi_done()

Thanks
Peter



  reply	other threads:[~2024-09-19 12:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20240910073035.25974-1-peter.wang@mediatek.com>
2024-09-10  7:30 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] ufs: core: fix the issue of ICU failure peter.wang
2024-09-10  7:30 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] ufs: core: requeue aborted request peter.wang
2024-09-10 17:59   ` Bart Van Assche
2024-09-11  6:03     ` Peter Wang (王信友)
2024-09-11 19:11       ` Bart Van Assche
2024-09-12 13:31         ` Peter Wang (王信友)
2024-09-12 21:17           ` Bart Van Assche
2024-09-13  7:10             ` Peter Wang (王信友)
2024-09-13 17:41               ` Bart Van Assche
2024-09-18 13:29                 ` Peter Wang (王信友)
2024-09-18 18:29                   ` Bart Van Assche
2024-09-19 12:16                     ` Peter Wang (王信友) [this message]
2024-09-19 18:49                       ` Bart Van Assche
2024-09-20  2:02                         ` Peter Wang (王信友)
2024-09-20 18:39                           ` Bart Van Assche
2024-09-23  7:06                             ` Peter Wang (王信友)
2024-09-14 16:13       ` Bart Van Assche
2024-09-18 13:30         ` Peter Wang (王信友)

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=f350a1dee5a03347b5e88b9d7249223ce7b72c08.camel@mediatek.com \
    --to=peter.wang@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Alice.Chao@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Chaotian.Jing@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Chun-hung.Wu@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Ed.Tsai@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Lin.Gui@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Naomi.Chu@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Powen.Kao@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Qilin.Tan@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Tun-yu.Yu@mediatek.com \
    --cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
    --cc=avri.altman@wdc.com \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=cc.chou@mediatek.com \
    --cc=eddie.huang@mediatek.com \
    --cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jiajie.hao@mediatek.com \
    --cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wsd_upstream@mediatek.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox