diff mbox series

[v3,3/3] scsi: Set allocation length to 255 for ATA Information VPD page

Message ID alpine.DEB.2.21.2201020030130.56863@angie.orcam.me.uk (mailing list archive)
State Not Applicable
Headers show
Series Bring the BusLogic host bus adapter driver up to Y2021 | expand

Commit Message

Maciej W. Rozycki Jan. 2, 2022, 11:23 p.m. UTC
Set the allocation length to 255 for the ATA Information VPD page 
requested in the WRITE SAME handler, so as not to limit information 
examined by `scsi_get_vpd_page' in the supported vital product data 
pages unnecessarily.

Originally it was thought that Areca hardware may have issues with a 
valid allocation length supplied for a VPD inquiry, however older SCSI 
standard revisions[1] consider 255 the maximum length allowed and what 
has later become the high order byte is considered reserved and must be 
zero with the INQUIRY command.  Therefore it was unnecessary to reduce 
the amount of data requested from 512 as far down as to 64, arbitrarily 
chosen, and 255 would as well do.

With commit b3ae8780b429 ("[SCSI] Add EVPD page 0x83 and 0x80 to sysfs") 
we have since got the SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN macro, so use that instead.

References:

[1] "Information technology - Small Computer System Interface - 2",
    WORKING DRAFT, X3T9.2, Project 375D, Revision 10L, 7-SEP-93, Section
    8.2.5 "INQUIRY command", pp.104-108

Signed-off-by: Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@orcam.me.uk>
Fixes: af73623f5f10 ("[SCSI] sd: Reduce buffer size for vpd request")
Tested-by: Nick Alcock <nick.alcock@oracle.com>
---
Changes from v2:

- Add Nick's Tested-by annotation. 

No changes from v1.
---
 drivers/scsi/sd.c |    5 +----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)

linux-scsi-write-same-vpd-buffer.diff

Comments

Douglas Gilbert Jan. 3, 2022, 4:09 a.m. UTC | #1
On 2022-01-02 6:23 p.m., Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> Set the allocation length to 255 for the ATA Information VPD page
> requested in the WRITE SAME handler, so as not to limit information
> examined by `scsi_get_vpd_page' in the supported vital product data
> pages unnecessarily.
> 
> Originally it was thought that Areca hardware may have issues with a
> valid allocation length supplied for a VPD inquiry, however older SCSI
> standard revisions[1] consider 255 the maximum length allowed and what
> has later become the high order byte is considered reserved and must be
> zero with the INQUIRY command.  Therefore it was unnecessary to reduce
> the amount of data requested from 512 as far down as to 64, arbitrarily
> chosen, and 255 would as well do.

Not arbitrary, 64 bytes would get all the fields less the 512 byte ATA
DEVICE IDENTIFY data field.

> With commit b3ae8780b429 ("[SCSI] Add EVPD page 0x83 and 0x80 to sysfs")
> we have since got the SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN macro, so use that instead.
> 
> References:
> 
> [1] "Information technology - Small Computer System Interface - 2",
>      WORKING DRAFT, X3T9.2, Project 375D, Revision 10L, 7-SEP-93, Section
>      8.2.5 "INQUIRY command", pp.104-108

Yes, 1992, long withdrawn and only used by several billion USB keys.

But the ATA Information VPD page first appeared in SAT around 2006 and the
length of that page was (and still is in SAT-5 drafts) "238h" (572 bytes
long (when the 4 byte header is considered)). So it needs 16 bits to
represent that length. SPC-3 (2005) bumped the allocation length field in
the INQUIRY command from 8 to 16 bits.

Finally SAT-1 in its approved references [2.2] says:
ISO/IEC 14776-453, SCSI Primary Commands - 3 (SPC-3) [ANSI INCITS 408-2005]

So any SAT layer that supplies the ATA Information VPD page should also
support (translating) an INQUIRY with a 16 bit allocation field.

How does your problem arise? Could USB mass storage be involved?

And this patch solves your problem by returning part of the ATA DEVICE
IDENTIFY data (which is 512 bytes long)? If so, why not say so.

And what about using 0x2ff as the INQUIRY allocation length? If the
broken device ignores the top byte, you get 255 bytes back. If a
correct device takes both bytes it should return 0x23c bytes after
resid is taken into account.



Not related to this patch:
sd_read_write_same() seems a strange name for a function given that
it is checking on WRITE SAME support. How about s/read/report/ ?
And calling scsi_report_opcode() on INQUIRY seems a weird time waster
(it actually checks if the SCSI version is < SPC-3 or does the check
on a _mandatory_ command). And for modern disks scsi_report_opcode()
is called 5 times. Why not call the REPORT SUPPORTED OPERATION CODES
command once and cache its result? It would save 4 commands in every
disk setup (or revalidation).

Doug Gilbert


> Signed-off-by: Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@orcam.me.uk>
> Fixes: af73623f5f10 ("[SCSI] sd: Reduce buffer size for vpd request")
> Tested-by: Nick Alcock <nick.alcock@oracle.com>
> ---
> Changes from v2:
> 
> - Add Nick's Tested-by annotation.
> 
> No changes from v1.
> ---
>   drivers/scsi/sd.c |    5 +----
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> linux-scsi-write-same-vpd-buffer.diff
> Index: linux-macro/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-macro.orig/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> +++ linux-macro/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> @@ -3101,16 +3101,13 @@ static void sd_read_write_same(struct sc
>   	}
>   
>   	if (scsi_report_opcode(sdev, buffer, SD_BUF_SIZE, INQUIRY) < 0) {
> -		/* too large values might cause issues with arcmsr */
> -		int vpd_buf_len = 64;
> -
>   		sdev->no_report_opcodes = 1;
>   
>   		/* Disable WRITE SAME if REPORT SUPPORTED OPERATION
>   		 * CODES is unsupported and the device has an ATA
>   		 * Information VPD page (SAT).
>   		 */
> -		if (!scsi_get_vpd_page(sdev, 0x89, buffer, vpd_buf_len))
> +		if (!scsi_get_vpd_page(sdev, 0x89, buffer, SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN))
>   			sdev->no_write_same = 1;
>   	}
>   
>
Maciej W. Rozycki Jan. 3, 2022, 9:06 p.m. UTC | #2
On Sun, 2 Jan 2022, Douglas Gilbert wrote:

> > Originally it was thought that Areca hardware may have issues with a
> > valid allocation length supplied for a VPD inquiry, however older SCSI
> > standard revisions[1] consider 255 the maximum length allowed and what
> > has later become the high order byte is considered reserved and must be
> > zero with the INQUIRY command.  Therefore it was unnecessary to reduce
> > the amount of data requested from 512 as far down as to 64, arbitrarily
> > chosen, and 255 would as well do.
> 
> Not arbitrary, 64 bytes would get all the fields less the 512 byte ATA
> DEVICE IDENTIFY data field.

 That may well be the case, however there is no justification given for 
the particular size of 64 bytes chosen either in the comment nearby or the 
change description associated with the commit referred this arrangement 
has originated from.  At the time of my original submission I examined the 
relevant thread of discussion[1] including the patch submission itself[2], 
and just to be sure I have double-checked it now and there is no mention 
as to why this value was chosen.  There is no associated macro that could 
give some explanation and which good coding style would expect rather than 
a magic number inline.

 So I do have all the reasons to conclude this value has indeed been 
arbitrarily chosen, don't I?

> > With commit b3ae8780b429 ("[SCSI] Add EVPD page 0x83 and 0x80 to sysfs")
> > we have since got the SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN macro, so use that instead.
> > 
> > References:
> > 
> > [1] "Information technology - Small Computer System Interface - 2",
> >      WORKING DRAFT, X3T9.2, Project 375D, Revision 10L, 7-SEP-93, Section
> >      8.2.5 "INQUIRY command", pp.104-108
> 
> Yes, 1992, long withdrawn and only used by several billion USB keys.

 Well, this has surfaced in a setup where devices dated 199x are used, so 
I guess they have all the rights to use whatever standard was most recent, 
or say second most recent at the time as we need to factor in design lead 
times.

> How does your problem arise? Could USB mass storage be involved?

 This command does crash the HBA involved where 1/3 and 2/3 have not been 
applied.  No USB involved, just these proper SCSI (SPI) targets:

scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access     IBM      DDYS-T18350M     SA5A PQ: 0 ANSI: 3
scsi 0:0:1:0: Direct-Access     SEAGATE  ST336607LW       0006 PQ: 0 ANSI: 3
scsi 0:0:5:0: Direct-Access     IOMEGA   ZIP 100          E.08 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2

as noted with 1/3 and 2/3.

 Not noted here as not directly relevant though, and this is because this 
change is a clean-up only, to have the buffer size consistent across the 
various `scsi_get_vpd_page' calls, by using the SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN macro 
defined meanwhile, that sets the maximum supported by older SCSI standard 
revisions (which can therefore be safely used without asking the device 
how much data it can/wants to actually return) and consequently devices 
implementing them.

 I noted in the original submission[3]:

> Nix,
> 
> I can see you're still around.  Would you therefore please be so kind
> as to verify this change with your Areca hardware if you still have it?
> 
> It looks to me like you were thinking in the right direction with:
> <https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/87vc3nuipg.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix/>.
> Sadly nobody seemed to have paid attention to your observation and neither
> were different buffer sizes considered (or at least it wasn't mentioned in
> the discussion).
> 
>  Maciej

-- and Nix was kind enough to verify my proposal works just fine with the 
piece of hardware the commit referred addressed a problem with, so the 
replacement buffer size is as good as the original one while making code 
consistent.  As you can see I did observe right away that the buffer size 
was not discussed.

 If you insist that the value of 64 stay, then please come up with a 
suitable macro name to define along with SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN that reflects the 
meaning of 64 in this context and I'll be happy to update 3/3 accordingly, 
but please explain why the value of 64 is any better than 255 here and the 
inconsistency with the buffer size justified.

> And this patch solves your problem by returning part of the ATA DEVICE
> IDENTIFY data (which is 512 bytes long)? If so, why not say so.

 As I noted above, this is for consistency with other `scsi_get_vpd_page' 
calls and to avoid an inline magic number.  If you think that it is not 
stated clearly enough in my change description and the change is otherwise 
acceptable, then I can update the explanation accordingly.

> And what about using 0x2ff as the INQUIRY allocation length? If the
> broken device ignores the top byte, you get 255 bytes back. If a
> correct device takes both bytes it should return 0x23c bytes after
> resid is taken into account.

 I have verified (some of) the devices listed above to correctly reject 
`scsi_get_vpd_page' requests with allocation length exceeding 255, as 
required by the SCSI standard revision at their time.  I can't speak of 
the INQUIRY command, as I haven't checked it in this context.

 Does my explanation clear your concerns?  If so, then please advise how 
to proceed with this change.  Thank you for your review.

References:

[1] "3.10.2 or 3.10.3: arcmsr failure at bootup / early userspace 
    transition", 
    <https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/87r4ehfzhf.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix/>

[2] "scsi disk: Use its own buffer for the vpd request", 
    <https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/51FA71E2.6010501@fastmail.fm/>

[3] "scsi: Set allocation length to 255 for ATA Information VPD page", 
    <https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/alpine.DEB.2.21.2104141306130.44318@angie.orcam.me.uk/>

  Maciej
Martin K. Petersen Jan. 3, 2022, 9:28 p.m. UTC | #3
Maciej,

>  So I do have all the reasons to conclude this value has indeed been 
> arbitrarily chosen, don't I?

The SAT spec defines the contents of the first part of the page. The
trailing 512 bytes are defined in the ATA spec.

> If you insist that the value of 64 stay, then please come up with a
> suitable macro name to define along with SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN that reflects
> the meaning of 64 in this context and I'll be happy to update 3/3
> accordingly, but please explain why the value of 64 is any better than
> 255 here and the inconsistency with the buffer size justified.

Can please you try the following patch?
Martin K. Petersen Jan. 3, 2022, 9:37 p.m. UTC | #4
Doug,

> sd_read_write_same() seems a strange name for a function given that
> it is checking on WRITE SAME support. How about s/read/report/ ?

It was chosen to be consistent with all the other sd_read_$VPD()
functions. sd_read_cache_type(), sd_read_block_limits(), etc.

> And calling scsi_report_opcode() on INQUIRY seems a weird time waster
> (it actually checks if the SCSI version is < SPC-3 or does the check
> on a _mandatory_ command).

The call to validate INQUIRY is really to check whether REPORT SUPPORTED
OPERATION CODES command is supported.

> And for modern disks scsi_report_opcode() is called 5 times. Why not
> call the REPORT SUPPORTED OPERATION CODES command once and cache its
> result? It would save 4 commands in every disk setup (or
> revalidation).

I have some patches that clean up discovery and start using cached
VPDs. I hadn't thought of caching the RSOC output. Will look into that.

I held this series back since I was concerned about them clashing with
Christoph's recent revalidate changes. I'll get them sent out shortly.
Maciej W. Rozycki Jan. 4, 2022, 1:52 p.m. UTC | #5
Martin,

> >  So I do have all the reasons to conclude this value has indeed been 
> > arbitrarily chosen, don't I?
> 
> The SAT spec defines the contents of the first part of the page. The
> trailing 512 bytes are defined in the ATA spec.

 I think that would best be reflected in code somehow as lone `64' doesn't 
say anything really.

> > If you insist that the value of 64 stay, then please come up with a
> > suitable macro name to define along with SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN that reflects
> > the meaning of 64 in this context and I'll be happy to update 3/3
> > accordingly, but please explain why the value of 64 is any better than
> > 255 here and the inconsistency with the buffer size justified.
> 
> Can please you try the following patch?

 I have tried it and it's neutral, that is with 1/3 applied the HBA still 
works and with 1/3 removed it still breaks (2/3 and 3/3 obviously don't 
build anymore).  Unsurprisingly, as it's the call to `scsi_get_vpd_page' 
rather than `scsi_get_vpd_buf' that causes an issue here.

 I think the latter function isn't called in my setup, and it's not clear 
to me anymore after so long why I didn't poke at it.  It looks to me like 
the `retry_pg' code there can be gone now with your update in place as it 
duplicates buffer sizing, and with that included it'll be a nice clean-up.

 NB you'll need to adjust drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_scsih.c accordingly 
if we are to move forward with this change, as it's another user of the 
SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN macro.

 Given what has been said in the discussion so far would you consider 2/3
and 3/3 unnecessary?  In the course of verifying your change I have looked 
through our code again and found that inline magic numbers are there in 
several though not all places where `scsi_get_vpd_page' gets called, so I 
think it would make sense to get rid of them all at once with a single 
self-contained change.

 Thank you for your input and the extra fix.

  Maciej
Martin K. Petersen Jan. 4, 2022, 5:57 p.m. UTC | #6
Maciej,

>  I have tried it and it's neutral, that is with 1/3 applied the HBA still 
> works and with 1/3 removed it still breaks (2/3 and 3/3 obviously don't 
> build anymore).  Unsurprisingly, as it's the call to `scsi_get_vpd_page' 
> rather than `scsi_get_vpd_buf' that causes an issue here.

Oh, you'll also need a follow-on patch that uses the cached ATA
Information VPD page. I'll try to get my full series out today.

>  NB you'll need to adjust drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_scsih.c accordingly 
> if we are to move forward with this change, as it's another user of the 
> SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN macro.

That'll also use cached information in my series.
Martin K. Petersen Jan. 6, 2022, 4:13 a.m. UTC | #7
Maciej,

> Oh, you'll also need a follow-on patch that uses the cached ATA
> Information VPD page. I'll try to get my full series out today.

I would really appreciate it if you would be willing give this a whirl:

	https://git.kernel.org/mkp/h/5.18/discovery

Thanks!
Damien Le Moal Jan. 6, 2022, 5:21 a.m. UTC | #8
On 1/6/22 13:13, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> 
> Maciej,
> 
>> Oh, you'll also need a follow-on patch that uses the cached ATA
>> Information VPD page. I'll try to get my full series out today.
> 
> I would really appreciate it if you would be willing give this a whirl:
> 
> 	https://git.kernel.org/mkp/h/5.18/discovery

Martin,

Indeed, my bad.

That said, it is weird that scsi_get_vpd_page() does not call
scsi_device_supports_vpd(). We could simplify everything like this:

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi.c
index f6af1562cba4..c27eabedf9e3 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi.c
@@ -341,7 +341,7 @@ int scsi_get_vpd_page(struct scsi_device *sdev, u8
page, unsigned char *buf,
 {
        int i, result;

-       if (sdev->skip_vpd_pages)
+       if (!scsi_device_supports_vpd(sdev))
                goto fail;

        /* Ask for all the pages supported by this device */
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
index 65875a598d62..2ef7953512ed 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
@@ -3316,12 +3316,10 @@ static int sd_revalidate_disk(struct gendisk *disk)
                blk_queue_flag_clear(QUEUE_FLAG_NONROT, q);
                blk_queue_flag_set(QUEUE_FLAG_ADD_RANDOM, q);

-               if (scsi_device_supports_vpd(sdp)) {
-                       sd_read_block_provisioning(sdkp);
-                       sd_read_block_limits(sdkp);
-                       sd_read_block_characteristics(sdkp);
-                       sd_zbc_read_zones(sdkp, buffer);
-               }
+               sd_read_block_provisioning(sdkp);
+               sd_read_block_limits(sdkp);
+               sd_read_block_characteristics(sdkp);
+               sd_zbc_read_zones(sdkp, buffer);

                sd_print_capacity(sdkp, old_capacity);

Since all the sd_read_xxx() functions do nothing if the vpd page needed
is not supported.
Maciej W. Rozycki Jan. 7, 2022, 10:36 a.m. UTC | #9
Martin,

> > Oh, you'll also need a follow-on patch that uses the cached ATA
> > Information VPD page. I'll try to get my full series out today.
> 
> I would really appreciate it if you would be willing give this a whirl:
> 
> 	https://git.kernel.org/mkp/h/5.18/discovery

 I have tried your tree and it does not clobber the HBA anymore, however 
partitions (of the MS-DOS type) are not recognised with any of the disks 
including one holding the root device, so the system fails to mount the 
root filesystem and therefore does not complete booting:

VFS: Cannot open root device "802" or unknown-block(8,2): error -6
Please append a correct "root=" boot option; here are the available partitions:
0800        17921835 sda
 driver: sd
0810        35843686 sdb
 driver: sd
0830          239816 sdd
 driver: sd
0b00         1048575 sr0
 driver: sr
Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(8,2)

-- is that expected?

 Here's the relevant part of the boot log:

scsi host0: BusLogic BT-958
scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access     IBM      DDYS-T18350M     SA5A PQ: 0 ANSI: 3
scsi 0:0:1:0: Direct-Access     SEAGATE  ST336607LW       0006 PQ: 0 ANSI: 3
scsi 0:0:4:0: Sequential-Access HP       C5683A           C908 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2
scsi 0:0:5:0: Direct-Access     IOMEGA   ZIP 100          E.08 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2
st: Version 20160209, fixed bufsize 32768, s/g segs 256
st 0:0:4:0: Attached scsi tape st0
st 0:0:4:0: st0: try direct i/o: yes (alignment 4 B)
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 35843670 512-byte logical blocks: (18.4 GB/17.1 GiB)
sd 0:0:5:0: [sdc] Media removed, stopped polling
sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] 71687372 512-byte logical blocks: (36.7 GB/34.2 GiB)
sd 0:0:5:0: [sdc] Attached SCSI removable disk
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: cb 00 00 08
sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: ab 00 10 08
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
sda: detected capacity change from 0 to 35843670
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk
sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
sdb: detected capacity change from 0 to 71687372
sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI disk
sd 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0
sd 0:0:1:0: Attached scsi generic sg1 type 0
st 0:0:4:0: Attached scsi generic sg2 type 1
sd 0:0:5:0: Attached scsi generic sg3 type 0

while upon a succesful boot with the upstream kernel (and my patch(es) 
applied) it looks like:

scsi host0: BusLogic BT-958
scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access     IBM      DDYS-T18350M     SA5A PQ: 0 ANSI: 3
scsi 0:0:1:0: Direct-Access     SEAGATE  ST336607LW       0006 PQ: 0 ANSI: 3
scsi 0:0:4:0: Sequential-Access HP       C5683A           C908 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2
scsi 0:0:5:0: Direct-Access     IOMEGA   ZIP 100          E.08 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2
st: Version 20160209, fixed bufsize 32768, s/g segs 256
st 0:0:4:0: Attached scsi tape st0
st 0:0:4:0: st0: try direct i/o: yes (alignment 4 B)
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 35843670 512-byte logical blocks: (18.4 GB/17.1 GiB)
sd 0:0:5:0: [sdc] Media removed, stopped polling
sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] 71687372 512-byte logical blocks: (36.7 GB/34.2 GiB)
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: cb 00 00 08
sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: ab 00 10 08
sd 0:0:5:0: [sdc] Attached SCSI removable disk
sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
 sdb: sdb1 sdb2
sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI disk
 sda: sda1 sda2 sda3 sda4 < sda5 sda6 sda7 sda8 sda9 sda10 >
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk
sd 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0
sd 0:0:1:0: Attached scsi generic sg1 type 0
st 0:0:4:0: Attached scsi generic sg2 type 1
sd 0:0:5:0: Attached scsi generic sg3 type 0

The failure is not specific to this HBA as `hdd' is a PATA device and it 
doesn't get its partitions scanned either.

 There's no significant difference between the two .config files:

--- ../linux-macro/.config
+++ .config
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 #
 # Automatically generated file; DO NOT EDIT.
-# Linux/i386 5.16.0-rc7 Kernel Configuration
+# Linux/i386 5.16.0-rc1 Kernel Configuration
 #
 CONFIG_CC_VERSION_TEXT="i386-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 11.0.0 20200919 (experimental)"
 CONFIG_CC_IS_GCC=y
@@ -518,7 +518,6 @@
 CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_MMAP_RND_BITS=y
 CONFIG_HAVE_EXIT_THREAD=y
 CONFIG_ARCH_MMAP_RND_BITS=8
-CONFIG_PAGE_SIZE_LESS_THAN_64KB=y
 CONFIG_ISA_BUS_API=y
 CONFIG_CLONE_BACKWARDS=y
 CONFIG_OLD_SIGSUSPEND3=y
@@ -1061,7 +1060,6 @@
 # CONFIG_SCSI_MPI3MR is not set
 # CONFIG_SCSI_SMARTPQI is not set
 # CONFIG_SCSI_UFSHCD is not set
-# CONFIG_SCSI_UFS_HWMON is not set
 # CONFIG_SCSI_HPTIOP is not set
 CONFIG_SCSI_BUSLOGIC=y
 # CONFIG_SCSI_FLASHPOINT is not set

 Shall I try anything else?

  Maciej
Martin K. Petersen Jan. 7, 2022, 2:03 p.m. UTC | #10
Maciej,

> I have tried your tree and it does not clobber the HBA anymore,

Excellent!

> however partitions (of the MS-DOS type) are not recognised with any of
> the disks including one holding the root device, so the system fails
> to mount the root filesystem and therefore does not complete booting:

My mistake. An unrelated change to the revalidate logic in the last
patch. Fixed and pushed.

For your Mylex issue I believe the first patch in the series is all
that's needed:

06a471da0937 ("scsi: core: Query VPD size before getting full page")

Thanks!
Martin K. Petersen Jan. 7, 2022, 2:07 p.m. UTC | #11
Damien,

> That said, it is weird that scsi_get_vpd_page() does not call
> scsi_device_supports_vpd(). 

The first patch in the series already makes that change.

I noticed because the allocation for sd_read_cpr() is fairly big so it
stuck out in my test runs while reworking scsi_get_vpd_page().

I didn't remove the conditional in sd_revalidate_disk(). While it is
superfluous, I do like that the "fancy" protocol features are
grouped. Guess we could switch it to a comment instead. I'll think about
it...
Maciej W. Rozycki Jan. 10, 2022, noon UTC | #12
Martin,

> > however partitions (of the MS-DOS type) are not recognised with any of
> > the disks including one holding the root device, so the system fails
> > to mount the root filesystem and therefore does not complete booting:
> 
> My mistake. An unrelated change to the revalidate logic in the last
> patch. Fixed and pushed.

 No worries, I'm glad I helped catch it early.  This version boots 
multi-user.

> For your Mylex issue I believe the first patch in the series is all
> that's needed:
> 
> 06a471da0937 ("scsi: core: Query VPD size before getting full page")

 It is.  Thanks for sorting out this issue!

  Maciej
Martin K. Petersen Jan. 10, 2022, 3:48 p.m. UTC | #13
Maciej,

>> For your Mylex issue I believe the first patch in the series is all
>> that's needed:
>> 
>> 06a471da0937 ("scsi: core: Query VPD size before getting full page")
>
>  It is.  Thanks for sorting out this issue!

Excellent, thanks for all the testing and for your work identifying this
issue!
diff mbox series

Patch

Index: linux-macro/drivers/scsi/sd.c
===================================================================
--- linux-macro.orig/drivers/scsi/sd.c
+++ linux-macro/drivers/scsi/sd.c
@@ -3101,16 +3101,13 @@  static void sd_read_write_same(struct sc
 	}
 
 	if (scsi_report_opcode(sdev, buffer, SD_BUF_SIZE, INQUIRY) < 0) {
-		/* too large values might cause issues with arcmsr */
-		int vpd_buf_len = 64;
-
 		sdev->no_report_opcodes = 1;
 
 		/* Disable WRITE SAME if REPORT SUPPORTED OPERATION
 		 * CODES is unsupported and the device has an ATA
 		 * Information VPD page (SAT).
 		 */
-		if (!scsi_get_vpd_page(sdev, 0x89, buffer, vpd_buf_len))
+		if (!scsi_get_vpd_page(sdev, 0x89, buffer, SCSI_VPD_PG_LEN))
 			sdev->no_write_same = 1;
 	}