On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 01:14:31PM +0530, Dakshaja Uppalapati wrote: > On Tuesday, May 05/26/20, 2020 at 12:25:42 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 07:36:43PM +0530, Dakshaja Uppalapati wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Issue which is reported in https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvme/CH2PR12MB40050ACF > > > 2C0DC7439355ED3FDD270@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#r8cfc80b26f0cd > > > 1cde41879a68fd6a71186e9594c is also seen on stable kernel 5.4.41. > > > > What issue is that? Your url is wrapped and can not work here :( > > Sorry for that, when I tried to format the disk discovered from target machine > the below error is seen in dmesg. > > dmesg: > [ 1844.868480] blk_update_request: I/O error, dev nvme0c0n1, sector 0 > op 0x3:(DISCARD) flags 0x4000800 phys_seg 1 prio class 0 > > The above issue is seen from kernel-5.5-rc1 onwards. > > > > > > In upstream issue is fixed with commit b716e6889c95f64b. > > > > Is this a regression or support for something new that has never worked > > before? > > > > This is a regression, bisects points to the commit 530436c4 and fixed with > commit b716e688 in upstream. > > Now same issue is seen with stable kernel-5.4.41, 530436c4 is part of it. So why don't we just revert 530436c45ef2 ("nvme: Discard workaround for non-conformant devices") from the stable trees? Will that fix the issue for you instead of the much-larger set of backports you are proposing? Also, is this an issue for you in the 4.19 releases? The above mentioned patch showed up in 4.19.92 and 5.4.7. > > > For stable 5.4 kernel it doesn’t apply clean and needs pulling in the following > > > commits. > > > > > > commit 2cb6963a16e9e114486decf591af7cb2d69cb154 > > > Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > > Date: Wed Oct 23 10:35:41 2019 -0600 > > > > > > commit 6f86f2c9d94d55c4d3a6f1ffbc2e1115b5cb38a8 > > > Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > > Date: Wed Oct 23 10:35:42 2019 -0600 > > > > > > commit 59ef0eaa7741c3543f98220cc132c61bf0230bce > > > Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > > Date: Wed Oct 23 10:35:43 2019 -0600 > > > > > > commit e9061c397839eea34207668bfedce0a6c18c5015 > > > Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > > Date: Wed Oct 23 10:35:44 2019 -0600 > > > > > > commit b716e6889c95f64ba32af492461f6cc9341f3f05 > > > Author: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Date: Sun Jan 26 23:23:28 2020 -0800 > > > > > > I tried a patch by including only necessary parts of the commits e9061c397839, > > > 59ef0eaa7741 and b716e6889c95. PFA. > > > > > > With the attached patch, issue is not seen. > > > > > > Please let me know on how to fix it in stable, can all above 5 changes be > > > cleanly pushed or if attached shorter version can be pushed? > > > > Do all of the above patches apply cleanly? Do they need to be > > backported? Have you tested that? Do you have such a series of patches > > so we can compare them? > > > > Yes I have tested, all the patches applied cleanly and attached all the patches > for your reference. They all can be pulled into 5.4 stable without any issues. > > 530436c4 -- culprit commit > 2cb6963a -- dependent commit > 6f86f2c9 -- dependent commit > 59ef0eaa -- dependent commit > e9061c39 -- dependent commit > be3f3114 -- dependent commit > b716e688 -- fix commit > > > The patch below is not in any format that I can take it in. ALso, 95% > > of the times we take a patch that is different from what is upstream > > will have bugs and problems over time because of that. So I always want > > to take the original upstream patches instead if at all possible. > > > > So I need a lot more information here in order to try to determine this, > > sorry. > > > > Thanks > Dakshaja > diff --git a/drivers/nvme/target/admin-cmd.c b/drivers/nvme/target/admin-cmd.c > index 831a062d27cb..3665b45d6515 100644 > --- a/drivers/nvme/target/admin-cmd.c > +++ b/drivers/nvme/target/admin-cmd.c <snip> I still don't understand what the patch here is, as you don't really provide any information about it in a format I am used to seeing. Can you redo it in the documented style of submitting a normal patch to the kernel tree so that might help explain things? thanks, greg k-h
