Sagi, > Sorry for the late reply, lost track of this. No problem! > Can you try attached patch and see if it solves your issue? > WARNING: very lightly tested... I have run our tests against this patch and it is working well for our "basic" testing as well. The test case that previously failed, now passes with this patch. So that's encouraging! Thanks for the quick response and quick patch. One question we had is regarding the hard coded header length: What happens if the initiator sends an extended CDB, like a WRITE32? Are there any concerns with an additional header segment (AHS)? Thanks again, Steve
