Hi MDR! On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 00:59 +0000, Rustad, Mark D wrote: > On 12/21/12 10:58 AM, "Mark Rustad" <mark.d.rustad@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >The following patches make changes to the PRLI response > >when tcm_fc is present. One patch clears the retry > >capability when a target is available. The other > >modifies the returned role to clear the target > >role when no target is provided to the node issuing > >the PRLI. > > > >Are these changes right? Are they complete, or are > >they maybe just a step in the right direction? > > > >These arose from issues that Bhanu was seeing. He > >has run these a bit, as have I, but they have not > >yet been through any serious validation. I thought > >it best to get more eyes on these before we go too > >far in validating that may not be right. > > > >--- > > > >Mark Rustad (2): > > tcm_fc: Do not report target role when target is not defined > > tcm_fc: Do not indicate retry capability to initiators > > > > > > drivers/target/tcm_fc/tfc_sess.c | 12 +++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > Hmm. Still no response at all on these patches. I really would like a > little feedback on them. > <nod>, holding off on including these into target-pending/master for the moment.. Ping Bhanu + Robert..? --nab -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe target-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
