Re: [PATCH] scsi: storvsc: Do not flag MAINTENANCE_IN return of SRB_STATUS_DATA_OVERRUN as an error

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

 




On 11/22/24 13:11, Michael Kelley wrote:
From: Cathy Avery <cavery@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2024 8:24 AM
This patch partially reverts

	commit 812fe6420a6e789db68f18cdb25c5c89f4561334
	Author: Michael Kelley <mikelley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
	Date:   Fri Aug 25 10:21:24 2023 -0700

	scsi: storvsc: Handle additional SRB status values

HyperV does not support MAINTENANCE_IN resulting in FC passthrough
returning the SRB_STATUS_DATA_OVERRUN value. Now that
SRB_STATUS_DATA_OVERRUN
is treated as an error multipath ALUA paths go into a faulty state as multipath
ALUA submits RTPG commands via MAINTENANCE_IN.

[    3.215560] hv_storvsc 1d69d403-9692-4460-89f9-a8cbcc0f94f3:
tag#230 cmd 0xa3 status: scsi 0x0 srb 0x12 hv 0xc0000001
[    3.215572] scsi 1:0:0:32: alua: rtpg failed, result 458752

This patch essentially restores the previous handling of MAINTENANCE_IN
along with supressing any logging noise.

Signed-off-by: Cathy Avery <cavery@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c b/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
index 7ceb982040a5..088fefe40999 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
@@ -149,6 +149,8 @@ struct hv_fc_wwn_packet {
  */
  static int vmstor_proto_version;

+static bool hv_dev_is_fc(struct hv_device *hv_dev);
+
  #define STORVSC_LOGGING_NONE	0
  #define STORVSC_LOGGING_ERROR	1
  #define STORVSC_LOGGING_WARN	2
@@ -980,6 +982,13 @@ static void storvsc_handle_error(struct vmscsi_request
*vm_srb,
  	void (*process_err_fn)(struct work_struct *work);
  	struct hv_host_device *host_dev = shost_priv(host);

+	// HyperV FC does not support MAINTENANCE_IN ignore
+	if ((scmnd->cmnd[0] == MAINTENANCE_IN) &&
+		(SRB_STATUS(vm_srb->srb_status) == SRB_STATUS_DATA_OVERRUN) &&
+		hv_dev_is_fc(host_dev->dev)) {
+		return;
+	}
+
Could use the following coding instead to avoid the explicit check of srb_status:

@@ -981,6 +981,16 @@ static void storvsc_handle_error(struct vmscsi_request *vm_srb,
         struct hv_host_device *host_dev = shost_priv(host);

         switch (SRB_STATUS(vm_srb->srb_status)) {
+       case SRB_STATUS_DATA_OVERRUN:
+               /*
+                * Hyper-V does not support MAINTENANCE_IN, resulting in FC
+                * passthrough returning DATA_OVERRUN. But treating as an
+                * error incorrectly puts ALUA paths into a fault state.
+                */
+               if ((scmnd->cmnd[0] == MAINTENANCE_IN) &&
+                               hv_dev_is_fc(host_dev->dev))
+                       return;
+               fallthrough;
         case SRB_STATUS_ERROR:
         case SRB_STATUS_ABORTED:
         case SRB_STATUS_INVALID_REQUEST:
@@ -988,7 +998,6 @@ static void storvsc_handle_error(struct vmscsi_request *vm_srb,
         case SRB_STATUS_TIMEOUT:
         case SRB_STATUS_SELECTION_TIMEOUT:
         case SRB_STATUS_BUS_RESET:
-       case SRB_STATUS_DATA_OVERRUN:
                 if (vm_srb->srb_status & SRB_STATUS_AUTOSENSE_VALID) {
                         /* Check for capacity change */

  	switch (SRB_STATUS(vm_srb->srb_status)) {
  	case SRB_STATUS_ERROR:
  	case SRB_STATUS_ABORTED:
@@ -1161,6 +1170,12 @@ static void storvsc_on_io_completion(struct storvsc_device *stor_device,
  	stor_pkt->vm_srb.sense_info_length = min_t(u8, STORVSC_SENSE_BUFFER_SIZE,
  		vstor_packet->vm_srb.sense_info_length);

+	// HyperV FC does not support MAINTENANCE_IN ignore
For consistency, prefer to not use C++ style comments.

+	if ((SRB_STATUS(vstor_packet->vm_srb.srb_status) == SRB_STATUS_DATA_OVERRUN) &&
+		(stor_pkt->vm_srb.cdb[0] == MAINTENANCE_IN) &&
+		hv_dev_is_fc(device))
+		goto skip_logging;
+
Just wondering:  There's already a hack earlier in this function for
INQUIRY and MODE_SENSE commands that sets scsi_status and
srb_status to indicate success. What if this case did the same? Then
nothing would be logged, and a special case would not be needed in
storvsc_handle_error().  Or do you still need the error and sense info to
propagate to higher levels?  (in which case what you've done here is OK)

Michael

It sounds like a reasonable idea. I'll try it out.

Cathy

  	if (vstor_packet->vm_srb.scsi_status != 0 ||
  	    vstor_packet->vm_srb.srb_status != SRB_STATUS_SUCCESS) {

@@ -1181,6 +1196,7 @@ static void storvsc_on_io_completion(struct storvsc_device *stor_device,
  			vstor_packet->status);
  	}

+skip_logging:
  	if (vstor_packet->vm_srb.scsi_status == SAM_STAT_CHECK_CONDITION &&
  	    (vstor_packet->vm_srb.srb_status & SRB_STATUS_AUTOSENSE_VALID))
  		memcpy(request->cmd->sense_buffer,
--
2.42.0





[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