É bem possível que seja devido a este commit:
0dec8c0d67c64401d97122e4eba347ccc5850622 is the first bad commit
commit 0dec8c0d67c64401d97122e4eba347ccc5850622
Author: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri May 13 12:04:06 2016 -0700
scsi_lib: correctly retry failed zero length REQ_TYPE_FS commands
commit a621bac3044ed6f7ec5fa0326491b2d4838bfa93 upstream.
When SCSI was written, all commands coming from the filesystem
(REQ_TYPE_FS commands) had data. This meant that our signal for needing
to complete the command was the number of bytes completed being equal to
the number of bytes in the request. Unfortunately, with the advent of
flush barriers, we can now get zero length REQ_TYPE_FS commands, which
confuse this logic because they satisfy the condition every time. This
means they never get retried even for retryable conditions, like UNIT
ATTENTION because we complete them early assuming they're done. Fix
this by special casing the early completion condition to recognise zero
length commands with errors and let them drop through to the retry code.
Eu acredito que pelo que entendi desta correção e os erros sendo vistos é que os comandos de passagem ATA com opcodes 0x85 "passagem de comando ATA (16)" e 0xa1 "passagem de comando ATA (12) / em branco" são sendo agora (possivelmente erroneamente) emitido e, portanto, causando essas mensagens de erro.
Examinando os dados do comando de passagem ATA, parece que um comando ATA SMART (tecnologia de auto-monitoramento, análise e relatório) está sendo emitido (código de comando 0xb0), estou especulando que talvez este H / W não esteja capaz de lidar com isso.