https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111441 --- Comment #10 from Serguei Bezverkhi <sbezverk@xxxxxxxxx> --- Hello, Any chance we could move forward with this investigation? I still cannot attach to any remove iscsi targets with either 4.4.0 or 4.4.1 kernels. Thank you Serguei -----Original Message----- From: Mike Christie [mailto:michaelc@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, February 01, 2016 11:55 AM To: Nicholas A. Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Serguei Bezverkhi (sbezverk) <sbezverk@xxxxxxxxx>; bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [Bug 111441] New: iscsi fails to attach to targets On 01/30/2016 01:38 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > On Fri, 2016-01-29 at 17:32 -0600, Mike Christie wrote: >> On 01/29/2016 04:21 PM, Serguei Bezverkhi (sbezverk) wrote: >>> HI Mike, >>> >>> I tried your patch and it is has eliminated first traceback but I still do not see my remote targets. >>> >> >> That is sort of expected. Your target is not setup for ALUA properly. >> It says it supports ALUA, but when scsi_dh_alua asks about the ports >> it is reporting there are none. Ccing the people that made the patch >> that added the issue and own the code. >> >> Hey Christoph and Hannes, >> >> The dh/alua changes that added this: >> >> error = scsi_dh_add_device(sdev); >> if (error) { >> sdev_printk(KERN_INFO, sdev, >> "failed to add device handler: %d\n", >> error); >> return error; >> } >> >> to scsi_sysfs_add_sdev are adding a regression. >> >> 1. If that fails, then we forget to do device_del before doing the >> return. My patch in this thread added that back, so we do not see the >> sysfs oopses anymore. But..... >> >> 2. It looks like in older kernels, we would allow misconfigured >> targets like this one to still setup devices. Do we want that old behavior back? >> Should we just ignore the return value from scsi_dh_add_device above? >> Note that in this case, it is LIO so it can be easily fixed on the >> target side by just setting it up properly. I do not think other >> targets would hit this type of issue. >> > > Btw, what does misconfigured mean here wrt target ALUA..? [ 25.833195] sd 6:0:0:4: alua: supports implicit and explicit TPGS [ 25.833360] sd 6:0:0:4: alua: No target port descriptors found [ 25.833363] sd 6:0:0:4: alua: Attach failed (-22) [ 25.833365] sd 6:0:0:4: failed to add device handler: -22 He has LIO configured to report it supports implicit/explicit ALUA, but the ports do not seem to be configured. For the LIO config side, are his LUNs just not in a the default_lu_gp or any other group? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. -- 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
