>>>>> "Akinobu" == Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> We don't issue WRITE SAME with PI so there is no prot SGL. >> Is there a specific reason why we don't? There really isn't much of a benefit when all you're doing is replicating zeroes. So it hasn't been very high on my list. Akinobu> It is not only for the WRITE SAME requests from block device Akinobu> but also for READ/WRITE with PROTECT=0 requests by SG_IO. Akinobu> So isn't is appropreate to allocate prot SGL in Akinobu> target_write_prot_action() (and mark se_cmd->se_cmd_flags to Akinobu> release it at deallocation time)? Correct. Just because a target is formatted with PI does not mean that every I/O it receives has PI attached. That's entirely driven by RDPROTECT/WRPROTECT/VRPROTECT at the initiator's discretion. It is an absolute requirement that the device, if formatted with PI, will generate and write the correct protection information when WRPROTECT is 0. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering -- 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
