Hi Bart/Roman,
> On Nov 11, 2019, at 8:48 PM, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 2019-11-11 03:28, Roman Bolshakov wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 08:21:35PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> The commit mentioned in the subject breaks point-to-point mode for at least
>>> the QLE2562 HBA. Restore point-to-point support by reverting that commit.
>>>
>>> Cc: Roman Bolshakov <r.bolshakov@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Quinn Tran <qutran@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Himanshu Madhani <hmadhani@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Fixes: 0aabb6b699f7 ("scsi: qla2xxx: Fix Nport ID display value") > Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@xxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_iocb.c | 7 +++----
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_iocb.c b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_iocb.c
>>> index b25f87ff8cde..cfd686fab1b1 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_iocb.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_iocb.c
>>> @@ -2656,10 +2656,9 @@ qla24xx_els_logo_iocb(srb_t *sp, struct els_entry_24xx *els_iocb)
>>> els_iocb->port_id[0] = sp->fcport->d_id.b.al_pa;
>>> els_iocb->port_id[1] = sp->fcport->d_id.b.area;
>>> els_iocb->port_id[2] = sp->fcport->d_id.b.domain;
>>> - /* For SID the byte order is different than DID */
>>> - els_iocb->s_id[1] = vha->d_id.b.al_pa;
>>> - els_iocb->s_id[2] = vha->d_id.b.area;
>>> - els_iocb->s_id[0] = vha->d_id.b.domain;
>>> + els_iocb->s_id[0] = vha->d_id.b.al_pa;
>>> + els_iocb->s_id[1] = vha->d_id.b.area;
>>> + els_iocb->s_id[2] = vha->d_id.b.domain;
>>>
>>> if (elsio->u.els_logo.els_cmd == ELS_DCMD_PLOGI) {
>>> els_iocb->control_flags = 0;
>>
>> The original commit definitely fixes P2P mode for QLE2700, the lowest
>> byte is domain, followed by AL_PA, followed by area. However the
>> fields are reserved in ELS IOCB for QLE2500, according to FW spec.
>>
>> Perhaps we should have a switch here for 2500 and the other one for
>> 2600/2700? Or, we should only set the fields only for QLE2700, to comply
>> with both specs.
> Himanshu, can you tell us which adapters and/or firmware versions need
> which version of the above code?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Bart.
All adapters with FW v4.4 will behave same. If you are running into issue with P2P connection,
it might be something different than specific to this code change. Original code in the driver was not
following firmware spec. This code is now used in initiator mode as well due to introduction of
FC-NVMe handling in the driver. Also, can you tell me what version of firmware you have on your
remote port.
Thanks,
Himanshu
