On 01/10/2014 02:09 AM, vaughan wrote: > On 01/10/2014 03:41 PM, Mike Christie wrote: >> On 1/10/14 12:11 AM, vaughan wrote: >>> I haven't figure out why it's rejected with "bookmark invalid"(9) >>> reason, rather than "command not supported". IMO "bookmark invalid" is >>> used when minor protocol conflict such as final flag not set with >>> non-write command. However, I haven't find error of this kind in >>> report_opcode, so I guess it's not supported on the target. >>> >> >> Is it possible to get a wireshark/tcpdump trace? It does not have to >> be during boot. We just need to see what commands are sent and the >> response the target is returning. >> >> I forgot we know some microsoft iscsi target people. We can just email >> them with the trace to confirm what is going on with the target. The >> trace seems to be easier for them than them interpreting linux kernel >> logs. > I enabled debug_iscsi_tcp, here is a more detailed log in normal connection. > Does "conn error (1020)" mean it's target peer who disconnect the > connection at the same time of reject report_opcode? Yes. > If it is, I think iSCSI boot failure can't be avoided without disable > write_same check on OEL. Yes, you are right. Due to how more distros do boot, iscsid will not be up and you will hang. If are talking about disablement though I think it should not be done at the iscsi layer. It should be some sort of white/black list at the scsi device layer or something like that. However, I will ping Microsoft and cc you and we can see what is up for sure. Maybe we will get lucky and they will have a release with a fix on their side. -- 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
