Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:26:55 +0100
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Anderson <andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
       James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
       linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
       IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>,
       Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Timeout regression introduced by	242f9dcb8ba6f68fcd217a119a7648a4f69290e9
Message-ID: <20081029132654.GE31673@kernel.dk>
References: <49043C7C.8050207@kernel.org> <1225034105.3958.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <49051EA4.3040403@kernel.org> <20081027213006.GB17946@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <490666D6.8090603@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <490666D6.8090603@kernel.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2028
Lines: 43

On Tue, Oct 28 2008, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Mike Anderson wrote:
> > Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> >> James Bottomley wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 18:46 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >>>> Hello, Jens.
> >>>>
> >>>> Commit 242f9dcb8ba6f68fcd217a119a7648a4f69290e9 introduces a strange
> >>>> regression for libata.  The second timeout gives puts different
> >>>> pointer from the issued command onto eh_cmd_q breaking libata EH
> >>>> command matching which triggers WARN_ON() in ata_eh_finish() and hangs
> >>>> command processing or causes oops later depending on circumstances.
> >>>>
> >>>> Here are logs with induced timeouts (patch attached).  In commit
> >>>> 242f9dcb8, the XXX messages for the second timeout shows different
> >>>> scsi_cmd pointers for eh_cmd_q and qc->scmd which is initialized by
> >>>> ata_scsi_qc_new() during command translation.
> >>> I can't see a way we could be getting a different command passed in from
> >>> the actual one, since the only way to lose the command from the request
> >>> is to go through the command completion routines which free it (and end
> >>> the request).
> >> I have no idea either.  It's something in the timeout logic because on
> >> the issue path the scmd pointer is identical but on tiemout pointer
> >> for another scmd is queued on eh_cmd_q, which doesn't make much sense.
> >>
> > 
> > I was trying to recreate this error using ata_ram wth v2.6.28-rc2.
> > Currently I am not able to see this error on timeout recovery using this
> > setup. Does IO load (or other factors) effect the error being seen?
> 
> Not at all.  That's the only write command I issued.

It's all extremely puzzling. Any chance I could talk you into stuffing
some debug printks in there to see what the hell is going on?

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/