On Wed, 2018-11-07 at 11:34 -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 10:52 AM Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > ndctl zero-labels completes with a large number of zeroed nmems when > > it fails to do zeroing on a protected NVDIMM. > > > > # ndctl zero-labels nmem1 > > zeroed 65504 nmems > > > > When an ACPI call completes with error, xlat_status() called from > > acpi_nfit_ctl() sets error to *cmd_rc. __nd_ioctl(), however, does > > not check this error and returns with success. > > > > Fix __nd_ioctl() to check this error in cmd_rc. > > So this arrangement is by design and the bug is in the ndctl utility. > > A successful return code from the ioctl means that the command was > successfully submitted to firmware. It's then up to userspace to parse > if there was a command specific error returned in the response > payload. Automatically returning cmd_rc removes the ability for > userspace tooling to do its own command specific error handling. With > this change userspace could no longer be sure if the failure is in the > submission or the execution of the command, or determine if the > command response payload is valid. I see. I was wondering which side needs to be fixed, and decided to follow kernel-internal ACPI calls like nvdimm_clear_poison(). I agree that a command error code is necessary if user space tool needs to deal with it. OK, I will look into fixing ndctl. Thanks, -Toshi
