On 11/03/2017 11:56 PM, James Smart wrote:
> When the HBA is connected to a private loop, the driver
> reports FLOGI loop-open failure as functional error. This is
> an expected condition.
>
> Mark loop-open failure as a warning instead of error.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dick Kennedy <dick.kennedy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: James Smart <james.smart@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_els.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_els.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_els.c
> index b14f7c5653cd..7df791047f55 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_els.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_els.c
> @@ -1030,29 +1030,36 @@ lpfc_cmpl_els_flogi(struct lpfc_hba *phba, struct lpfc_iocbq *cmdiocb,
>
> stop_rr_fcf_flogi:
> /* FLOGI failure */
> - lpfc_printf_vlog(vport, KERN_ERR, LOG_ELS,
> - "2858 FLOGI failure Status:x%x/x%x TMO:x%x "
> - "Data x%x x%x\n",
> - irsp->ulpStatus, irsp->un.ulpWord[4],
> - irsp->ulpTimeout, phba->hba_flag,
> - phba->fcf.fcf_flag);
> + if (!(irsp->ulpStatus == IOSTAT_LOCAL_REJECT &&
> + ((irsp->un.ulpWord[4] & IOERR_PARAM_MASK) ==
> + IOERR_LOOP_OPEN_FAILURE)))
> + lpfc_printf_vlog(vport, KERN_ERR, LOG_ELS,
> + "2858 FLOGI failure Status:x%x/x%x "
> + "TMO:x%x Data x%x x%x\n",
> + irsp->ulpStatus, irsp->un.ulpWord[4],
> + irsp->ulpTimeout, phba->hba_flag,
> + phba->fcf.fcf_flag);
>
> /* Check for retry */
> if (lpfc_els_retry(phba, cmdiocb, rspiocb))
> goto out;
>
> - /* FLOGI failure */
> - lpfc_printf_vlog(vport, KERN_ERR, LOG_ELS,
> - "0100 FLOGI failure Status:x%x/x%x TMO:x%x\n",
> - irsp->ulpStatus, irsp->un.ulpWord[4],
> - irsp->ulpTimeout);
> -
> -
> /* If this is not a loop open failure, bail out */
> if (!(irsp->ulpStatus == IOSTAT_LOCAL_REJECT &&
> ((irsp->un.ulpWord[4] & IOERR_PARAM_MASK) ==
> - IOERR_LOOP_OPEN_FAILURE)))
> + IOERR_LOOP_OPEN_FAILURE))) {
> + /* FLOGI failure */
> + lpfc_printf_vlog(vport, KERN_ERR, LOG_ELS,
> + "0100 FLOGI failure Status:x%x/x%x TMO:x%x\n",
> + irsp->ulpStatus, irsp->un.ulpWord[4],
> + irsp->ulpTimeout);
> goto flogifail;
> + }
> +
> + lpfc_printf_vlog(vport, KERN_WARNING, LOG_ELS,
> + "0150 FLOGI failure Status:x%x/x%x TMO:x%x\n",
> + irsp->ulpStatus, irsp->un.ulpWord[4],
> + irsp->ulpTimeout);
>
> /* FLOGI failed, so there is no fabric */
> spin_lock_irq(shost->host_lock);
>
Isn't that a bit excessive?
Printing the same message _two_ times, and not providing additional info?
Please do only duplicate message if there is new information printed;
otherwise we might as well skip the second message.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
