Hi James,
On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 10:38:48PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-02-06 at 23:26 +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
(...)
> > We don't have the referenced commit above in 3.10 so we should be
> > safe. Additionally I checked that neither 4.4 nor 3.12 have them
> > either, so that makes me feel confident that we can skip it in 3.10
> > as well.
>
> The original was also racy with respect to multiple commands, so the
> above fixed the race as well.
OK so I tried to backport it to 3.10. I dropped a few parts which were
addressing this one marked for stable 4.4+ :
7ff723a ("scsi: mpt3sas: Unblock device after controller reset")
And I got the attached patch. All I know is that it builds. I'd appreciate
it if someone could confirm its validity, in which case I'll add it.
Thanks,
Willy
---
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_base.h b/drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_base.h
index 994656c..997e13f 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_base.h
+++ b/drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_base.h
@@ -219,6 +219,7 @@ struct MPT3SAS_TARGET {
* @eedp_enable: eedp support enable bit
* @eedp_type: 0(type_1), 1(type_2), 2(type_3)
* @eedp_block_length: block size
+ * @ata_command_pending: SATL passthrough outstanding for device
*/
struct MPT3SAS_DEVICE {
struct MPT3SAS_TARGET *sas_target;
@@ -227,6 +228,17 @@ struct MPT3SAS_DEVICE {
u8 configured_lun;
u8 block;
u8 tlr_snoop_check;
+ /*
+ * Bug workaround for SATL handling: the mpt2/3sas firmware
+ * doesn't return BUSY or TASK_SET_FULL for subsequent
+ * commands while a SATL pass through is in operation as the
+ * spec requires, it simply does nothing with them until the
+ * pass through completes, causing them possibly to timeout if
+ * the passthrough is a long executing command (like format or
+ * secure erase). This variable allows us to do the right
+ * thing while a SATL command is pending.
+ */
+ unsigned long ata_command_pending;
};
#define MPT3_CMD_NOT_USED 0x8000 /* free */
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_scsih.c b/drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_scsih.c
index e414b71..db38f70 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_scsih.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_scsih.c
@@ -3515,9 +3515,18 @@ _scsih_eedp_error_handling(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd, u16 ioc_status)
SAM_STAT_CHECK_CONDITION;
}
-static inline bool ata_12_16_cmd(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd)
+static int _scsih_set_satl_pending(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd, bool pending)
{
- return (scmd->cmnd[0] == ATA_12 || scmd->cmnd[0] == ATA_16);
+ struct MPT3SAS_DEVICE *priv = scmd->device->hostdata;
+
+ if (scmd->cmnd[0] != ATA_12 && scmd->cmnd[0] != ATA_16)
+ return 0;
+
+ if (pending)
+ return test_and_set_bit(0, &priv->ata_command_pending);
+
+ clear_bit(0, &priv->ata_command_pending);
+ return 0;
}
/**
@@ -3547,13 +3556,6 @@ _scsih_qcmd_lck(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd, void (*done)(struct scsi_cmnd *))
scsi_print_command(scmd);
#endif
- /*
- * Lock the device for any subsequent command until command is
- * done.
- */
- if (ata_12_16_cmd(scmd))
- scsi_internal_device_block(scmd->device);
-
scmd->scsi_done = done;
sas_device_priv_data = scmd->device->hostdata;
if (!sas_device_priv_data || !sas_device_priv_data->sas_target) {
@@ -3568,6 +3570,19 @@ _scsih_qcmd_lck(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd, void (*done)(struct scsi_cmnd *))
return 0;
}
+ /*
+ * Bug work around for firmware SATL handling. The loop
+ * is based on atomic operations and ensures consistency
+ * since we're lockless at this point
+ */
+ do {
+ if (test_bit(0, &sas_device_priv_data->ata_command_pending)) {
+ scmd->result = SAM_STAT_BUSY;
+ scmd->scsi_done(scmd);
+ return 0;
+ }
+ } while (_scsih_set_satl_pending(scmd, true));
+
sas_target_priv_data = sas_device_priv_data->sas_target;
/* invalid device handle */
@@ -4057,8 +4072,7 @@ _scsih_io_done(struct MPT3SAS_ADAPTER *ioc, u16 smid, u8 msix_index, u32 reply)
if (scmd == NULL)
return 1;
- if (ata_12_16_cmd(scmd))
- scsi_internal_device_unblock(scmd->device, SDEV_RUNNING);
+ _scsih_set_satl_pending(scmd, false);
mpi_request = mpt3sas_base_get_msg_frame(ioc, smid);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html