Re: [PATCH v4] scsi: libsas: Fix the failure of adding phy with zero-address to port

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

 



Hi John,

On 2023/11/28 3:28, John Garry wrote:
On 24/11/2023 02:27, yangxingui wrote:
We already do this in sas_ex_join_wide_port(), right?
No, If the addr of ex_phy matches dev->parent, sas_ex_join_wide_port() will not be called, but sas_add_parent_port() will be called  as follows:
static int sas_ex_discover_dev(struct domain_device *dev, int phy_id)
{
         struct expander_device *ex = &dev->ex_dev;
         struct ex_phy *ex_phy = &ex->ex_phy[phy_id];
         struct domain_device *child = NULL;
         int res = 0;

     <...>
         /* Parent and domain coherency */
         if (!dev->parent && sas_phy_match_port_addr(dev->port, ex_phy)) {
                 sas_add_parent_port(dev, phy_id);
                 return 0;
         }
         if (dev->parent && sas_phy_match_dev_addr(dev->parent, ex_phy)) {
                 sas_add_parent_port(dev, phy_id);
                 if (ex_phy->routing_attr == TABLE_ROUTING)
                         sas_configure_phy(dev, phy_id, dev->port->sas_addr, 1);
                 return 0;
         }
     <...>
}


I am not saying that what we do now does not have a problem - I am just trying to understand what currently happens

ok, because ex_phy->port is not set when calling sas_add_parent_port(), when deleting phy from the parent wide port, it is not removed from the phy_list of the parent wide port as follows:
static void sas_unregister_devs_sas_addr(struct domain_device *parent,
                                          int phy_id, bool last)
{
     <...>
     // Since ex_phy->port is not set, this branch will not be enter

But then how does this ever work? It is because we follow path sas_rediscover_dev() -> sas_discover_new() -> sas_ex_discover_devices() -> sas_ex_discover_dev() -> sas_add_parent_port(), and not sas_rediscover_dev() -> sas_discover_new() -> sas_ex_join_wide_port()? If so, is that because ephy->sas_attached_phy == 0 in sas_discover_new() -> sas_ex_join_wide_port() and it fails?

BTW, about something mentioned earlier - adding the phy19 with SAS_ADDR

Yes,
For phy19, when the phy is attached and added to the parent wide port, the path is:
sas_rediscover()
	->sas_discover_new()
		->sas_ex_discover_devices()
			->sas_ex_discover_dev()
				-> sas_add_parent_port().
And the path called when it is removed from parent wide port is:
sas_rediscover()
->sas_unregister_devs_sas_addr() // The sas address of phy19 becomes 0. Since ex_phy->port is NULL, phy19 is not removed from the parent wide port's phy_list.

For phy0, it is connected to a new sata device.
sas_rediscover()
	->sas_discover_new()->sas_ex_phy_discover()
							->sas_ex_phy_discover_helper()
->sas_set_ex_phy() // The device type is stp. Since the linkrate is 5 and less than 1.5G, sas_address is set to 0.
						->sas_ex_discover_devices()
							->sas_ex_discover_dev()
								->sas_ex_discover_end_dev()
									->sas_port_alloc() // Create port-7:7:0
									->sas_ex_get_linkrate()
->sas_port_add_phy() // Try adding phy19 to port->7:7:0, triggering BUG()

Thanks,
Xingui
.




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux