Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH 08/16] ahci: clear error register before NCQ cmd

[John Snow]

On 06/22/2015 10:43 AM, John Snow wrote:
> 
> 
> On 06/22/2015 10:38 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 09:50:39PM -0400, John Snow wrote:
>>> The legacy ide command execution layer will clear any errors
>>> outstanding before execution, but the NCQ layer doesn't. Even on
>>> success, this register will remain clogged.
>>>
>>> Clear it out before each NCQ command so the guest can tell if
>>> the error code produced after completion is meaningful or not.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: John Snow <address@hidden> --- hw/ide/ahci.c | 2
>>> ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/hw/ide/ahci.c b/hw/ide/ahci.c index 6bded67..e63ba9b
>>> 100644 --- a/hw/ide/ahci.c +++ b/hw/ide/ahci.c @@ -1048,6 +1048,8
>>> @@ static void process_ncq_command(AHCIState *s, int port,
>>> uint8_t *cmd_fis, ncq_tfs->lba, ncq_tfs->lba +
>>> ncq_tfs->sector_count - 1, ide_state->nb_sectors - 1);
>>>
>>> +    ide_state->error = 0;
>>
>> I'm not sure it makes sense use ide_state at all in NCQ.
>>
>> ide_state is per-port and NCQ can issue multiple asynchronous
>> commands per port.  If process_ncq_command() modifies ide_state, it
>> may do that while other commands are still pending or about to be
>> processed.
>>
>> This will clobber ide_state->error.
>>
> 
> Good point. The real problem that we need to fix then is in the core
> IDE layer, which tends to set a "default error" and waits for
> ide_exec_cmd to clear it before execution.
> 
> If we don't clear that bit somehow, we will get failed commands.
> 
> I'll have to do a little research to see if it's safe to remove our
> startup error, since it might be part of an ATA signature handshake.
> 

It is indeed part of a startup signature and should not be removed.

> Hmm.
> 
> Maybe it's not actually a problem because any real OS should probably
> have issued ATA IDENTIFY (which will clear ERR) by the time they get
> to NCQ, so maybe we can scrap this, and I'll adjust the test accordingly
> to issue at least IDENTIFY before attempting NCQ.

It's not exquisitely clear what the NCQ state machine for SATA should
look like -- I need to figure out what a real device might do if you
attempt to send it an NCQ command before a "hello."

Or I'll just ignore this whole train of thought under the premise that
every OS alive will always send an IDENTIFY packet first, and be on my way.