From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bhuna.collabora.co.uk ([2a00:1098:0:82:1000:25:2eeb:e3e3]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kmzwv-0000Cm-5m for linux-um@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 09 Dec 2020 13:56:10 +0000 From: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] um: ubd: Submit all data segments atomically References: <20201122041356.1454413-1-krisman@collabora.com> Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2020 10:56:01 -0300 In-Reply-To: <20201122041356.1454413-1-krisman@collabora.com> (Gabriel Krisman Bertazi's message of "Sat, 21 Nov 2020 23:13:56 -0500") Message-ID: <87blf35bim.fsf@collabora.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-um" Errors-To: linux-um-bounces+geert=linux-m68k.org@lists.infradead.org To: jdike@addtoit.com Cc: Martyn Welch , richard@nod.at, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, kernel@collabora.com, Christopher Obbard , anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com Gabriel Krisman Bertazi writes: > Internally, UBD treats each physical IO segment as a separate command to > be submitted in the execution pipe. If the pipe returns a transient > error after a few segments have already been written, UBD will tell the > block layer to requeue the request, but there is no way to reclaim the > segments already submitted. When a new attempt to dispatch the request > is done, those segments already submitted will get duplicated, causing > the WARN_ON below in the best case, and potentially data corruption. [...] > Cc: Christopher Obbard > Reported-by: Martyn Welch > Signed-off-by: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi > Tested-by: Christopher Obbard > Acked-by: Anton Ivanov ping. :) -- Gabriel Krisman Bertazi _______________________________________________ linux-um mailing list linux-um@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um