Adding Correct Quinn. Please use "qutran@xxxxxxxxxx"
We'll take a look at the series
On 9/12/19, 8:49 AM, "linux-scsi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Roman Bolshakov" <linux-scsi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of r.bolshakov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 06:37:22AM +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 9/12/19 1:39 AM, Roman Bolshakov wrote:
> > This series has a few bug fixes for the driver.
> >
> > Note, #1 only fixes the crash in the kernel. The complete fix for clean
> > ACL deletion from initiator side is in works and requires a discussion.
> >
> > As of now initiator is not aware that target no longer wants talking to
> > it, that implies unneeded timeout. It might be fixed by making LOGO
> > explicit on session deletion but it's an issue I want to raise first
> > before making the change. Whether we need implicit LOGO in qla2xxx,
> > explicit or use both.
> >
> > Also, an unsolicited ABTS from a port without session would still result
> > in BA_RJT response instead of frame discard and LOGO ELS, as specified
> > in FCP (12.3.3 Target FCP_Port response to Exchange termination):
> >
> > When an ABTS-LS is received at the target FCP_Port, it shall abort
> > the designated Exchange and return one of the following responses:
> >
> > a) the target FCP_Port shall discard the ABTS-LS and transmit a LOGO
> > ELS if the Nx_Port issuing the ABTS-LS is not currently logged in
> > (i.e., no N_Port Login exists);
> >
> > FWIW, the target driver can receive ABTS as part of ABORT TASK/LUN
> > RESET/CLEAR TASK SET TMFs and in case of failed sequence retransmission
> > requests, exchange or sequence errors. IIRC, some initiators requeue
> > SCSI commands if BA_RJT is received. Therefore, a timely LOGO will
> > prevent a perceived session freeze on the initiators.
>
> Hi Roman,
>
> Has this patch series been prepared against Linus' master branch,
> against Martin's 5.3/scsi-fixes or against Martin's 5.4/scsi-queue
> branch? I'm asking this because some patches in this series look similar
> to patches that are already present in the 5.4/scsi-queue branch.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
Hi Bart,
To be honest it was prepared against next-20190904 but it applies to
5.4/scsi-queue cleanly. The fixes made two weeks ago look promising but
are related to stuck PRLI and unhandled RSCN while #4 is related to
stuck PLOGI after qla_post_els_plogi_work.
Thank you,
Roman
