Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc3 01/11] ide: task_end_request() fix

[Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz]

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 15:49:22 +0900, Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 04:58:03PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 17:38:14 +0900 (KST), Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > 01_ide_task_end_request_fix.patch
> > >
> > >         task_end_request() modified to always call ide_end_drive_cmd()
> > >         for taskfile requests.  Previously, ide_end_drive_cmd() was
> > >         called only when task->tf_out_flags.all was set.  Also,
> > >         ide_dma_intr() is modified to use task_end_request().
> > >
> > >         * fixes taskfile ioctl oops bug which was caused by referencing
> > >           NULL rq->rq_disk of taskfile requests.
> >
> > I fixed it in slightly different way in ide-dev-2.6 - by calling
> > ide_end_request() instead of ->end_request().
> 
>  Taskfile DMA path is still broken.  Also calling ide_end_request()
> will work there, but IMHO it's just cleaner to finish special commands
> inside ide_end_drive_cmd().  Currently,

I agree but please note that your patch makes *all* taskfile registers to
be exposed through HDIO_DRIVE_TASKFILE regardless of ->rf_in_flags
(and obviously later you can't revert this change).

>  * Successful flagged taskfile                  -> ide_end_drive_cmd()
>  * All other successful non-DMA special cmds    -> ide_end_request()
>  * Successful DMA taskfile                      -> segfault

Have you tested it?  Why would it segfault?

>  * All failed special cmds                      -> ide_end_drive_cmd()
> 
>  It just shouldn't be like this.  :-(

Yep.

> >
> > >         * enables TASKFILE ioctls to get valid register outputs on
> > >           successful completion.
> >
> > This change makes *all* taskfile registers to be read on completion
> > of *any* command.  Currently this is done only for flagged taskfiles
> > and commands using no-data protocol.
> >
> > With all your changes it will be also done for:
> > * HDIO_DRIVE_[TASKFILE,CMD] ioctls
> > * /proc/ide/hd?/{identify,smart_thresholds,smart_values}
> > but reading back all registers is not always needed.
> 
>  None is on a hot path or even near to one, but maybe I don't have
> enough experience with old hardware.  Are there some old hardware
> which make the additional reads stand out?

I dunno, better be safe then sorry, after all we are working
on the *stable* kernel tree.

Converting HDIO_DRIVE_CMD and in-kernel users to
soon-to-be-implemented ;-) sane discrete interface shouldn't
require much effort.

> > It is already bad enough (and we can't fix it cause it is exported
> > to user-space through HDIO_DRIVE_TASKFILE), we shouldn't
> > make it worse.
> 
>  Yeah, the whole IDE ioctl interface seems disturbingly messy. :-(
> 
>  * Register output is available only if
>         1. The command fails.
>         2. The command is a flagged taskfile.

3. the command uses no-data protocol

>  * taskfile->device_head is used regardless of outflags setting.
>  * In flagged taskfile, taskfile->device_head can turn on the device
>    bit, so we can issue commands to hdb with permissions to hda.
>  * In TASK and TASKFILE, LBA commands can be issued to drives in CHS
>    mode but the reverse isn't true.  However, in TASKFILE, if the
>    command isn't flagged, the lower nibble of device register is
>    zeroed depending on addressing setting.
>  * taskfile->data endianess is reversed on big endian machines.
>  * ide_reg_valid_t endianess issue.
>  * And, none of above is documented.
> 
>  So, I don't know.  Do you think we should keep all of the above
> behaviors?  Please let me know; then, I'll update ioctl/hdio.txt so

Now read again the list above and think about amount of time required
to *safely* fix all the issues mentioned vs introducing sane interface.
Please also note that once we expose something to user-space
applications may depend on the broken behavior so we can't fix all
issues anyway.

If somebody implements SG_IO ioctl and SCSI command pass-through
from libata for IDE driver (and add possibility for discrete taskfiles), we can
just deprecate HDIO_DRIVE_TASKFILE, forget about it and some time later
remove this FPOS.

> that people can at least know these gotchas.

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