Re: [PATCH 4/5] scsi: libsas: check the ata device status by ata_dev_enabled()

[Jason Yan]

On 2018/9/18 21:54, John Garry wrote:
> +
>
> On 12/09/2018 09:29, Jason Yan wrote:
> > When ata device IDENTIFY failed, the ata device status is
> > ATA_DEV_UNKNOWN. The libata reported like:
> >
> > [113518.620433] ata5.00: qc timeout (cmd 0xec)
> > [113518.653646] ata5.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x4)
> >
> > But libsas verifies the device status by ata_dev_disabled(), which
> > skiped ATA_DEV_UNKNOWN. This will make libsas think the ata device
>
> /s/skiped/skipped/

OK, thanks.

> > probing succeed the device cannot be actually brought up. And even the
> > new bcast of this device will be considered as flutter and will not
> > probe this device again.
> >
> > Change ata_dev_disabled() to !ata_dev_enabled() so that libsas can
> > deal with this if the ata device probe failed. New bcasts can let us
> > try to probe the device again and bring it up if it is fine to
> > IDENTIFY.
> >
> > Tested-by: Zhou Yupeng <zhouyupeng1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Yan <yanaijie@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> > CC: John Garry <john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@xxxxxxx>
> > CC: Ewan Milne <emilne@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> > CC: Tomas Henzl <thenzl@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c
> > b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c
> > index 64a958a99f6a..4f6cdf53e913 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c
> > @@ -654,7 +654,7 @@ void sas_probe_sata(struct asd_sas_port *port)
> >          /* if libata could not bring the link up, don't surface
> >           * the device
> >           */
> > -        if (ata_dev_disabled(sas_to_ata_dev(dev)))
> > +        if (!ata_dev_enabled(sas_to_ata_dev(dev)))
>
> I do wonder if ata_dev_disabled() needs to be updated to cover
> ATA_DEV_UNKNOWN also or even instead of this change?

We cannot do this now because this will make the ata eh process wrong.

> >              sas_fail_probe(dev, __func__, -ENODEV);
> >      }
>
>
>
> .