[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45805D54.3070809@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 12:06:44 -0800
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com>
To: Patrick Mansfield <patmans@...ibm.com>
CC: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-ide@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] libata: Simulate REPORT LUNS for ATAPI devices
Patrick Mansfield wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 03:32:20PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>> The Quantum GoVault SATAPI removable disk device returns ATA_ERR in
>> response to a REPORT LUNS packet. If this happens to an ATAPI device
>> that is attached to a SAS controller (this is the case with sas_ata),
>> the device does not load because SCSI won't touch a "SCSI device"
>> that won't report its LUNs. Since most ATAPI devices don't support
>> multiple LUNs anyway, we might as well fake a response like we do for
>> ATA devices.
>
> If the REPORT LUNS fails, we should fall back to a sequential scan.
>
> Is (or why isn't) the error propagated back to scsi?
I believe the error is reported back to SCSI, which attempts to follow
up with TEST UNIT READY. Unfortunately, for some reason the device then
gets dropped. libata normally calls __scsi_add_device with lun=0, but
SAS calls scsi_scan_target with lun=SCAN_WILD_CARD, which is why SCSI
sends REPORT LUNs in the first place.
As an alternative I suppose we could detect ATA devices in sas_rphy_add
and change that SCAN_WILD_CARD to "0".
--D
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists