> -----Original Message----- > From: James Bottomley [mailto:James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 4:53 AM > To: KY Srinivasan > Cc: gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ohering@xxxxxxxx; > hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; apw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [PATCH RESEND 1/1] Drivers: scsi: storvsc: Properly handle errors > from the host > > On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 12:38 +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: KY Srinivasan > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 11:14 AM > > > To: KY Srinivasan; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > ohering@xxxxxxxx; > > > jbottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > > apw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH RESEND 1/1] Drivers: scsi: storvsc: Properly handle errors > > > from the host > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: K. Y. Srinivasan [mailto:kys@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2012 3:27 PM > > > > To: gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > > > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > ohering@xxxxxxxx; > > > > jbottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > > > apw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > Cc: KY Srinivasan > > > > Subject: [PATCH RESEND 1/1] Drivers: scsi: storvsc: Properly handle errors > from > > > > the host > > > > > > > > If the host returns error for pass through commands, deal with them > > > > appropriately. I would like to thank James for patiently helping > > > > me with this patch. > > > > > > James, > > > > > > Thank you for suggesting the fix here. I hope this is what you were looking > for. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > K. Y > > OK, I have the patch, but the change log is a bit rubbish. I changed it > to > > Hyper-V cannot process some commands like ATA_12 and ATA_16. It also returns > a > very generic error when this happens (SRB_STATUS_ERROR). Most of the time > we > treat SRB_STATUS_ERROR as DID_TARGET_FAILURE which causes error handler > retry, > but in the case of pass through commands, they'll never succeed (and the error > handler will offline the device), so put a discriminating block in the command > completion routing and send the SRB_STATUS_ERROR upwards with > DID_PASSTHROUGH > for commands we know should not be retried. Looks good; thanks James. K. Y ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{������ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
