From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EDF1C61CE4 for ; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 14:37:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 284682086D for ; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 14:37:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="rfYpi2ht" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728184AbfASOhl (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jan 2019 09:37:41 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-f180.google.com ([209.85.215.180]:35503 "EHLO mail-pg1-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728168AbfASOhl (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jan 2019 09:37:41 -0500 Received: by mail-pg1-f180.google.com with SMTP id s198so7444694pgs.2 for ; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 06:37:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3kRLm9sWlKk6B2B1dzaSmj3RajnCuJQbbf2dnoemKh8=; b=rfYpi2htxxaB2vmgyFqBS8latsSjvPLvWk5J5NE+UY7G4OfBn7s1GJ1ZQsgU6RWHK1 QGm/T5sV3mSU0EIApuRLL68YOWSD63XvblT5W+3L4wckNQLMqyATiA4AYnen6a0OS/RF H/RtiOnaLfnnJAdUr7tYiRTjTZRlyqzzVlRqq542GuBIQP/W0fFi7B6oGLUFcak03bm+ C5UIP5vh6iCIGicLwekQQN8EQpqaUAszdE5bTSC4/sKEmrQGOuRQA/Bx9UCZsI8t2Xv9 YuQ9UsAqHZ6R2rNiHiAx6UgiMlEzIJUvMAHH4LKyhemlIPXFtUNWj4QNBNI/0pKdiw+l NXbw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=3kRLm9sWlKk6B2B1dzaSmj3RajnCuJQbbf2dnoemKh8=; b=oCKVrep3RuY1QQSIRHdjxXvwyrEVhv2byy4FY65C20D8kmCh3bu1U1bDM13xvoV58c y7aStzkW+oJ9Ysn1vyalfUrmdWSblD9OlfX5Ks6AZnN3F4rmCsm4q86HtZiuOuNxhEGW 9DIvKEXXQ5yCUtiz7FWa/G4UMPUg9BS2sbE74MIAfZ9Iij1zKacq2kvtHPVRZYrCplZ+ esVP534jYw63F5wOUCOdAQoe0wnDJMj/esnCsdaKGLp0iU0vnRv/HNJsCOr9tqk6ehvL JCQppQHEJYct5brymv+m6jB8sPu0zQSpPdqeIN2aCpM7/8/d0HAaSF6j+WZ0FTmDFYTe oTrg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukfcTpoC28bsKoLA+bP/u6v/8uinhnjvboK2+kee3lo49LmGxTaS OThs8PlbeSOkOseC8DRZ/4l9Nw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN63usghEEnR7Gu439+e4dZwcNGUdN2LLGo7rpXenDPKxaECbr/YoPwBIlK69y+nsnQnfCeubQ== X-Received: by 2002:a62:5ec5:: with SMTP id s188mr23051226pfb.145.1547908660591; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 06:37:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.121] (66.29.188.166.static.utbb.net. [66.29.188.166]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o66sm16324111pgo.75.2019.01.19.06.37.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 19 Jan 2019 06:37:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: dd hangs when reading large partitions To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: "jianchao.wang" , Marc Gonzalez , fsdevel , linux-block , SCSI , Alexander Viro , Jan Kara , Joao Pinto , Fujita Tomonori , Paolo Valente References: <398a6e83-d482-6e72-5806-6d5bbe8bfdd9@oracle.com> <20190119095601.GA7440@infradead.org> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <6cbe0bc6-1a6b-5333-9a2e-a67c8e104672@kernel.dk> Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 07:37:37 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190119095601.GA7440@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 1/19/19 2:56 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 10:48:15AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> It's UFS that totally buggy, if you look at its queuecommand, it does: >> >> if (!down_read_trylock(&hba->clk_scaling_lock)) >> return SCSI_MLQUEUE_HOST_BUSY; >> >> UFS either needs to get fixed up, or we'll want a way to do something like >> the below. > > I think the right answer is to just revert the offending patch instead > of papering over it in the SCSI code. I fully agree. -- Jens Axboe