Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <087b77f8-3ff2-87ce-d197-e238b8ad9047@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 8 May 2023 00:02:59 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ata: libata-scsi: Fix get identity data failed
Content-Language: en-US
To:     John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>,
        yangxingui <yangxingui@huawei.com>, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
        martin.petersen@oracle.com
Cc:     linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linuxarm@huawei.com, prime.zeng@hisilicon.com,
        kangfenglong@huawei.com
References: <20230505025712.19438-1-yangxingui@huawei.com>
 <291f1d97-9195-45ac-8e12-058f5c797277@kernel.org>
 <b13c9445-39c5-f207-d5d0-d6c86eee54ae@oracle.com>
 <1b703656-e966-63f8-19dd-33e4e9914676@huawei.com>
 <cae0ac63-f391-08c0-c646-23037485c189@oracle.com>
From:   Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
Organization: Western Digital Research
In-Reply-To: <cae0ac63-f391-08c0-c646-23037485c189@oracle.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2023/05/05 18:51, John Garry wrote:
> On 05/05/2023 10:14, yangxingui wrote:
>>> hmmm... is it really acceptable that libata is referencing libsas? I 
>>> didn't think that it would be. libsas uses libata, not the other way 
>>> around.
>> Yeah, I didn't expect that either. Is there any other way? If so, is 
>> patch v1 OK?
> 
> I still think that we can do better than v1.
> 
>>>
>>>>>   #include <linux/libata.h>
>>>>>   #include <linux/hdreg.h>
>>>>>   #include <linux/uaccess.h>
>>>>> @@ -2745,10 +2746,17 @@ static struct ata_device 
>>>>> *__ata_scsi_find_dev(struct ata_port *ap,
>>>>>    *    Associated ATA device, or %NULL if not found.
>>>>>    */
>>>>>   struct ata_device *
>>>>> -ata_scsi_find_dev(struct ata_port *ap, const struct scsi_device 
>>>>> *scsidev)
>>>> Why drop the const ?
>>>>
>>>>> +ata_scsi_find_dev(struct ata_port *ap, struct scsi_device *scsidev)
>>>>>   {
>>>>> -    struct ata_device *dev = __ata_scsi_find_dev(ap, scsidev);
>>>>> +    struct ata_device *dev;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    if (ap->flags & ATA_FLAG_SAS_HOST) {
>>>
>>> And this is SAS host. Not necessarily libsas (even though with ipr 
>>> libata usage gone, it would be the only user).
>> Add a new flag only for libsas?
> 
> No, because of previous reason.
> 
> Please remind me - at what point do we error within ata_scsi_find_dev() 
> and return NULL for a libsas host?
> 
> Note: it would be good to include that commit message for future reference.
> 
> Maybe we could add a method to ata_port_operations to do this lookup. I 
> assume that is abusing ata_port_operations purpose, since it's mostly 
> for HW methods.
> 
> Or do we actually use sdev->hostdata for libata or libsas? If not, maybe 
> we could store the struct ata_device pointer there.
> 
> I'm just thinking out loud now...

Agree. Ideally, libasas should not be any different than a for a drive used with
ahci/sata/pata adapters. After all, all of them are scsi devices as well. So we
need to understand why this happens only with libsas and correct the device
setup there.

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research