Am 04.06.2010 16:06, schrieb Kevin Wolf: > Am 31.05.2010 03:43, schrieb Nicholas A. Bellinger: >> From: Nicholas Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> This patch updates hw/scsi-bus.c to add PERSISTENT_RESERVE_OUT and PERSISTENT_RESERVE_IN >> case in scsi_req_length() to extra the incoming buffer length into SCSIRequest->cmd.xfer, >> and adds a second PERSISTENT_RESERVE_OUT case in scsi_req_xfer_mode() in order to properly >> set SCSI_XFER_TO_DEV for WRITE data. >> >> Tested with Linux KVM guests and Megasas 8708EM2 HBA emulation and TCM_Loop target ports. >> >> Signed-off-by: Nicholas A. Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> hw/scsi-bus.c | 5 +++++ >> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/hw/scsi-bus.c b/hw/scsi-bus.c >> index b8e4b71..75ec74e 100644 >> --- a/hw/scsi-bus.c >> +++ b/hw/scsi-bus.c >> @@ -325,6 +325,10 @@ static int scsi_req_length(SCSIRequest *req, uint8_t *cmd) >> case INQUIRY: >> req->cmd.xfer = cmd[4] | (cmd[3] << 8); >> break; >> + case PERSISTENT_RESERVE_OUT: >> + case PERSISTENT_RESERVE_IN: >> + req->cmd.xfer = cmd[8] | (cmd[7] << 8); > > Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't exactly the same value set in the > switch block above? (for cmd[0] >> 5 == 2) Nicholas? This isn't applied yet because I'm waiting for your answer. Is there a reason why it makes sense to do it explicitly here instead using the generic code a few lines above? I think the same applied to patch 2/2. Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
