Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] scsi: libsas: Reset num_scatter if libata mark qc as
 NODATA
To:     John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>,
        Jason Yan <yanaijie@huawei.com>,
        "Jolly Shah" <jollys@google.com>, <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        <martin.petersen@oracle.com>, <a.darwish@linutronix.de>,
        <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>, <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>
CC:     <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20210318225632.2481291-1-jollys@google.com>
 <5e7ea537-86ab-f654-1df4-765364116e18@huawei.com>
 <993f97da-01f0-262b-3fbe-66fa1769698a@huawei.com>
From:   luojiaxing <luojiaxing@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <f74c0003-dbbf-5b4a-87f2-cd5571ea412e@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Mar 2021 16:40:26 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <993f97da-01f0-262b-3fbe-66fa1769698a@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Precedence: bulk


On 2021/3/20 20:14, John Garry wrote:
> On 19/03/2021 01:43, Jason Yan wrote:
>>
>>
>> 在 2021/3/19 6:56, Jolly Shah 写道:
>>> When the cache_type for the scsi device is changed, the scsi layer
>>> issues a MODE_SELECT command. The caching mode details are communicated
>>> via a request buffer associated with the scsi command with data
>>> direction set as DMA_TO_DEVICE (scsi_mode_select). When this command
>>> reaches the libata layer, as a part of generic initial setup, libata
>>> layer sets up the scatterlist for the command using the scsi command
>>> (ata_scsi_qc_new). This command is then translated by the libata layer
>>> into ATA_CMD_SET_FEATURES (ata_scsi_mode_select_xlat). The libata layer
>>> treats this as a non data command (ata_mselect_caching), since it only
>>> needs an ata taskfile to pass the caching on/off information to the
>>> device. It does not need the scatterlist that has been setup, so it 
>>> does
>>> not perform dma_map_sg on the scatterlist (ata_qc_issue). 
>>> Unfortunately,
>>> when this command reaches the libsas layer(sas_ata_qc_issue), libsas
>>> layer sees it as a non data command with a scatterlist. It cannot
>>> extract the correct dma length, since the scatterlist has not been
>>> mapped with dma_map_sg for a DMA operation. When this partially
>>> constructed SAS task reaches pm80xx LLDD, it results in below warning.
>>>
>>> "pm80xx_chip_sata_req 6058: The sg list address
>>> start_addr=0x0000000000000000 data_len=0x0end_addr_high=0xffffffff
>>> end_addr_low=0xffffffff has crossed 4G boundary"
>>>
>>> This patch updates code to handle ata non data commands separately so
>>> num_scatter and total_xfer_len remain 0.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 53de092f47ff ("scsi: libsas: Set data_dir as DMA_NONE if 
>>> libata marks qc as NODATA")
>>> Signed-off-by: Jolly Shah <jollys@google.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
>
> @luojiaxing, can you please test this?


Sure, let me take a look, and reply the test result here later


Thanks

Jiaxing


>
>>> ---
>>> v2:
>>> - reorganized code to avoid setting num_scatter twice
>>>
>>>   drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c | 9 ++++-----
>>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c 
>>> b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c
>>> index 024e5a550759..8b9a39077dba 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c
>>> @@ -201,18 +201,17 @@ static unsigned int sas_ata_qc_issue(struct 
>>> ata_queued_cmd *qc)
>>>           memcpy(task->ata_task.atapi_packet, qc->cdb, 
>>> qc->dev->cdb_len);
>>>           task->total_xfer_len = qc->nbytes;
>>>           task->num_scatter = qc->n_elem;
>>> +        task->data_dir = qc->dma_dir;
>>> +    } else if (qc->tf.protocol == ATA_PROT_NODATA) {
>>> +        task->data_dir = DMA_NONE;
>>
>> Hi Jolly & John,
>>
>> We only set DMA_NONE for ATA_PROT_NODATA, I'm curious about why 
>> ATA_PROT_NCQ_NODATA and ATAPI_PROT_NODATA do not need to set DMA_NONE?
>
> So we can see something like atapi_eh_tur() -> ata_exec_internal(), 
> which is a ATAPI NONDATA and has DMA_NONE, so should be ok.
>
> Other cases, like those using the xlate function on the qc for 
> ATA_PROT_NCQ_NODATA, could be checked further.
>
> For now, we're just trying to fix the fix.
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jason
>>
>>
>>>       } else {
>>>           for_each_sg(qc->sg, sg, qc->n_elem, si)
>>>               xfer += sg_dma_len(sg);
>>>           task->total_xfer_len = xfer;
>>>           task->num_scatter = si;
>>> -    }
>>> -
>>> -    if (qc->tf.protocol == ATA_PROT_NODATA)
>>> -        task->data_dir = DMA_NONE;
>>> -    else
>>>           task->data_dir = qc->dma_dir;
>>> +    }
>>>       task->scatter = qc->sg;
>>>       task->ata_task.retry_count = 1;
>>>       task->task_state_flags = SAS_TASK_STATE_PENDING;
>>>
>> .
>
>
> .
>