On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 09:44 +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > On 1/10/2014 8:53 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 12:43 +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > >> On 1/8/2014 10:36 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > >>> From: Nicholas Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> This patch adds support for DIF related CHECK_CONDITION ASC/ASCQ > >>> exception cases into transport_send_check_condition_and_sense(). > >>> > >>> This includes: > >>> > >>> LOGICAL BLOCK GUARD CHECK FAILED > >>> LOGICAL BLOCK APPLICATION TAG CHECK FAILED > >>> LOGICAL BLOCK REFERENCE TAG CHECK FAILED > >>> > >>> that used by DIF TYPE1 and TYPE3 failure cases. > >>> > >>> Cc: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > >>> Cc: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx> > >>> Cc: Sagi Grimberg <sagig@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> Cc: Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/target/target_core_transport.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> include/target/target_core_base.h | 3 +++ > >>> 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c b/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c > >>> index 91953da..707ee17 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c > >>> @@ -2648,6 +2648,36 @@ transport_send_check_condition_and_sense(struct se_cmd *cmd, > >>> buffer[SPC_ASC_KEY_OFFSET] = 0x1d; > >>> buffer[SPC_ASCQ_KEY_OFFSET] = 0x00; > >>> break; > >>> + case TCM_LOGICAL_BLOCK_GUARD_CHECK_FAILED: > >>> + /* CURRENT ERROR */ > >>> + buffer[0] = 0x70; > >>> + buffer[SPC_ADD_SENSE_LEN_OFFSET] = 10; > >>> + /* ILLEGAL REQUEST */ > >>> + buffer[SPC_SENSE_KEY_OFFSET] = ILLEGAL_REQUEST; > >>> + /* LOGICAL BLOCK GUARD CHECK FAILED */ > >>> + buffer[SPC_ASC_KEY_OFFSET] = 0x10; > >>> + buffer[SPC_ASCQ_KEY_OFFSET] = 0x01; > >> > > Hey Nic, > > In my iSER patches I constructed the same sense buffer (call > isert_pi_err_sense_buffer) and called isert_put_rsponse. So I should > call this routine instead correct? Yes, it should be OK to use this for generating CHECK_CONDITION from fabric protection failures in isert_completion_rdma_write() code after device->unreg_rdma_mem() has been called. --nab -- 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
