On Wed, 2018-11-07 at 11:34 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 10:52 AM Toshi Kani wrote:
> >
> > ndctl zero-labels completes with a large number of zeroed nmems when
> > it fails to do zeroing on a protected NVDIMM.
> >
> > # ndctl zero-labels nmem1
> > zeroed 65504 nmems
> >
> > When an ACPI call completes with error, xlat_status() called from
> > acpi_nfit_ctl() sets error to *cmd_rc. __nd_ioctl(), however, does
> > not check this error and returns with success.
> >
> > Fix __nd_ioctl() to check this error in cmd_rc.
>
> So this arrangement is by design and the bug is in the ndctl utility.
>
> A successful return code from the ioctl means that the command was
> successfully submitted to firmware. It's then up to userspace to parse
> if there was a command specific error returned in the response
> payload. Automatically returning cmd_rc removes the ability for
> userspace tooling to do its own command specific error handling. With
> this change userspace could no longer be sure if the failure is in the
> submission or the execution of the command, or determine if the
> command response payload is valid.
I see. I was wondering which side needs to be fixed, and decided to
follow kernel-internal ACPI calls like nvdimm_clear_poison(). I agree
that a command error code is necessary if user space tool needs to deal
with it. OK, I will look into fixing ndctl.
Thanks,
-Toshi
___
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
