Re: [PATCH] libata: Allow SOFT_RESET for Sil3726

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello,

On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 01:44:27PM -0700, Gwendal Grignou wrote:
> Yes. Until the device sends the async D2H Reg FIS indicating the drive
> spun up, the MPM does not accept the SoftRest FIS from the controller.
> On most controller, that fine, the controller state machine keeps
> retrying, but on Sil3132 it stops after a second or so and send an
> error back to the driver.

I see.

> > So, now libata waits for full reset period before proceeding to reset
> > PMP.  Hmmm... yeah, it makes sense.  Unfortunately, the only way to
> > achieve spinup wait in this case is waiting blindly and libata's reset
> > timeouts are configured to accomodate drive spinup times.  PMP SCR
> > failure kinda destroys those blind wait periods.
>
> Yes, I totally agree this blind wait is not clean. Normally we would
> wait until an event occurs [async FIS] and have the timeout just for
> the error case.
> Here we wait [10s] because we think the device is spinning up.

Yes but that's exactly how the reset timeouts are set up.  They're
supposed to provide reasonable spinup timeouts when the proper wait
mechanisms can't do so and here it becomes a problem because the blind
timeouts are circumvented by SCR read failure handling.

> > I'm not too sure about ATA_LFLAG_WAIT_SRST.  I don't think making the
> > new behavior default would hurt.
>
> I see your point. But if there is no PMP, Sil3132 is behaving, there
> is no need of this logic.

Yes, sure, the behavior is necessary iff PMP is attached as that's
only time SCR read failure can occur anyway and I think it would
generally be a good idea to always enforce the blind timeouts if PMP
is attached, so no need for ATA_LFLAG_WAIT_SRST.

> > Can you please post before & after logs?
> There are 2 problem with the current solution:
> - by not waiting for device spin up, we basically disabled staggered
> spinup: we send hard reset to all port very fast.
> That may put burden on enclosure with weak power supplies.
> - as Derry found out, disk which are slow to spin up can be ignored by
> the kernel.

Looks pretty good to me.  Nice spotting.  Thanks a lot for tracking it
down and coming up with good solution. :)

--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux RAID]     [Git]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Newbie]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux