James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 13:53 -0700, Mike Anderson wrote: > > Does this help any? While Alexis and I where working on a expander timeout > > issue the abort was never working for us. I compared the adp abort and the > > aic94xx abort code and made these changes. This appears to make the abort > > work for us now. A few lines of the changes are not related to the abort. > > YMMV, a better solution would be to know the exact format of the abort. > > Actually, no. I still seem to get the same problem (at least it BUGs in > the same place ... I haven't dug down to see if I'm getting the same > return value). Well the adp driver had a comment that the 0x1D error code means that it cannot find the command in its execution queue as it already has sent the command to the target(if I mapped this right between the two drivers). What looks odd is in the adp driver that move to a higher level of recovery (i.e., lun reset) if they receive this code, but in the aic94xx we mark the task TMF_RESP_FUNC_COMPLETE which appears wrong as you found out with the BUG_ON. -andmike -- Michael Anderson andmike@xxxxxxxxxx - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
