On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 02:31:58PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2019, Piergiorgio Sartor wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 07:38:33PM +0200, Piergiorgio Sartor wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 06:37:22PM +0200, Piergiorgio Sartor wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:23:26AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:14:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > > > Let's bring this to the attention of some more people.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It looks like the bug that was supposed to be fixed by commit
> > > > > > d74ffae8b8dd ("usb-storage: Add a limitation for
> > > > > > blk_queue_max_hw_sectors()"), which is part of 5.2.5, but apparently
> > > > > > the bug still occurs.
> > > > >
> > > > > Piergiorgio,
> > > > >
> > > > > can you dump the content of max_hw_sectors_kb file for your USB storage
> > > > > device and send that to this thread?
> > > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > for both kernels, 5.1.20 (working) and 5.2.8 (not working),
> > > > the content of /sys/dev/x:y/queue/max_hw_sectors_kb is 512
> > > > for USB storage devices (2.0 and 3.0).
> > > >
> > > > This is for the PC showing the issue.
> > > >
> > > > In an other PC, which does not show the issus at the moment,
> > > > the values are 120, for USB2.0, and 256, for USB3.0.
> > >
> > > Hi again,
> > >
> > > any news on this?
> > >
> > > Is there anything I can do to help?
> > >
> > > Should I report this somewhere else too?
> > >
> > > Currently this is quite a huge problem for me,
> > > since the only working external storage is an
> > > old 1394 HDD...
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm now on kernel 5.2.16, from Fedora, and still I
> > see the same issue.
> >
> > I guess it is not a chipset quirk, since there
> > are two involved here.
> > For the USB 2.0 I've (with "lspci"):
> >
> > USB controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI] SB7x0/SB8x0/SB9x0 USB EHCI Controller (prog-if 20 [EHCI])
> >
> > For USB 3.0 I've:
> >
> > USB controller: ASMedia Technology Inc. ASM1042 SuperSpeed USB Host Controller (prog-if 30 [XHCI])
> >
> > Any idea on how to proceed?
> >
> > Thanks a lot.
>
> One thing you can try is git bisect from 5.1.20 (or maybe just 5.1.0)
> to 5.2.8. If you can identify a particular commit which caused the
> problem to start, that would help.
OK, I tried a bisect (2 days compilations...).
Assuming I've done everything correctly (how to
test this? How to remove the guilty patch?), this
was the result:
09324d32d2a0843e66652a087da6f77924358e62 is the first bad commit
commit 09324d32d2a0843e66652a087da6f77924358e62
Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Date: Tue May 21 09:01:41 2019 +0200
block: force an unlimited segment size on queues with a virt boundary
We currently fail to update the front/back segment size in the bio when
deciding to allow an otherwise gappy segement to a device with a
virt boundary. The reason why this did not cause problems is that
devices with a virt boundary fundamentally don't use segments as we
know it and thus don't care. Make that assumption formal by forcing
an unlimited segement size in this case.
Fixes: f6970f83ef79 ("block: don't check if adjacent bvecs in one bio can be mergeable")
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
:040000 040000 57ba04a02f948022c0f6ba24bfa36f3b565b2440 8c925f71ce75042529c001bf244b30565d19ebf3 M block
What to do now?
Thanks,
bye,
--
piergiorgio
