On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:10:22 -0700 ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 11:51 PM, FUJITA Tomonori > <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 09:42:02 +0300 >> Roi Dayan <roi.dayan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 3:39 AM, FUJITA Tomonori >>> <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> > On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 15:58:02 +0300 >>> > Roi Dayan <roi.dayan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> > >>> >> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Roi Dayan <roi.dayan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >> > On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 1:06 PM, <frederik.vos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> I tested also version 1.0.28: no problem >>> >> >> version 1.0.29: no problem >>> >> >> version 1.0.30: there is the problem >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > Hi, >>> >> > >>> >> > I tested as well with ESXi 5.1 and I could not login with ESXi as initiator >>> >> > The error from tgtd was as follows: >>> >> > >>> >> > tgtd: add_mode_page(1648) Mode Page 10 (0x01): param_count 6 != MODE >>> >> > PAGE size : 31 >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > I checked for commits between 1.0.29 - 1.0.30 that modify or call this >>> >> > function and found >>> >> > that commit 9a95b4431ccc01b82cb4febc735485cd06cd5ea4 added a new call >>> >> > to add_mode_page() >>> >> > and the error is the result of that new call: >>> >> > >>> >> > 518 + /* Control Extensions mode page: TCMOS:1 */ >>> >> > 519 + add_mode_page(lu, "0x0a:1:0x1c:0x04:0x00:0x00"); >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > After removing this call ESXi logged in fine and without any problems. >>> >> > >>> >> > frederik, >>> >> > mind trying it as well? >>> > >>> > I guess that it's due to compare-and-write command but I might be >>> > wrong. >>> > >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> The failure is because add_mode_page expect size of data according to >>> the size specified in the page string >>> i.e. for the call: add_mode_page(lu, "0x0a:1:0x1c:0x04:0x00:0x00"); >>> the size is 0x1c (28) and the data count is 3 (0x04 0x00:0x00) so >>> add_mode_page fails. >>> >>> The patch I sent accepts it and it means rest of the bytes in the page >>> data will be 0 because of how the page is allocated. >> >> Ah, I see. Thanks for the explanation. >> >> >>> Do you still want a patch to update the callers instead? >> >> No. Your patch sounds ok. Ronnie, any opinion? >> >> But I don't think that your patch fixes Frederik's problem. > > Ouch, > > That is definitely a bug for the 0x0a:0x01 modepage as Roi points out. > I have been travelling and my mailbox is a bit 'unstructured' right > now so I can not see Roi's patch > but as SPC states this modepage must be 0x1c in size, (spc4 7.5.8) > we should pad the mode page from the current 6 bytes to the proper 31 > bytes byt adding zeroes to it. Yeah, but COMPARE_AND_WRITE bug is not related with this? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stgt" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
