Re: [PATCH 02/14] target: Add DIF CHECK_CONDITION ASC/ASCQexception cases

[Nicholas A. Bellinger]

On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 09:44 +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> On 1/10/2014 8:53 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 12:43 +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> >> On 1/8/2014 10:36 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> >>> From: Nicholas Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>
> >>> This patch adds support for DIF related CHECK_CONDITION ASC/ASCQ
> >>> exception cases into transport_send_check_condition_and_sense().
> >>>
> >>> This includes:
> >>>
> >>>     LOGICAL BLOCK GUARD CHECK FAILED
> >>>     LOGICAL BLOCK APPLICATION TAG CHECK FAILED
> >>>     LOGICAL BLOCK REFERENCE TAG CHECK FAILED
> >>>
> >>> that used by DIF TYPE1 and TYPE3 failure cases.
> >>>
> >>> Cc: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> >>> Cc: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx>
> >>> Cc: Sagi Grimberg <sagig@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Cc: Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>>    drivers/target/target_core_transport.c |   30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>    include/target/target_core_base.h      |    3 +++
> >>>    2 files changed, 33 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c b/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
> >>> index 91953da..707ee17 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
> >>> @@ -2648,6 +2648,36 @@ transport_send_check_condition_and_sense(struct se_cmd *cmd,
> >>>    		buffer[SPC_ASC_KEY_OFFSET] = 0x1d;
> >>>    		buffer[SPC_ASCQ_KEY_OFFSET] = 0x00;
> >>>    		break;
> >>> +	case TCM_LOGICAL_BLOCK_GUARD_CHECK_FAILED:
> >>> +		/* CURRENT ERROR */
> >>> +		buffer[0] = 0x70;
> >>> +		buffer[SPC_ADD_SENSE_LEN_OFFSET] = 10;
> >>> +		/* ILLEGAL REQUEST */
> >>> +		buffer[SPC_SENSE_KEY_OFFSET] = ILLEGAL_REQUEST;
> >>> +		/* LOGICAL BLOCK GUARD CHECK FAILED */
> >>> +		buffer[SPC_ASC_KEY_OFFSET] = 0x10;
> >>> +		buffer[SPC_ASCQ_KEY_OFFSET] = 0x01;
> >>
> 
> Hey Nic,
> 
> In my iSER patches I constructed the same sense buffer (call 
> isert_pi_err_sense_buffer) and called isert_put_rsponse. So I should 
> call this routine instead correct?

Yes, it should be OK to use this for generating CHECK_CONDITION from
fabric protection failures in isert_completion_rdma_write() code after
device->unreg_rdma_mem() has been called.

--nab

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/