[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140709084644.GH6012@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 01:46:44 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...uxdriverproject.org,
ohering@...e.com, jbottomley@...allels.com, jasowang@...hat.com,
apw@...onical.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] drivers: scsi: storvsc: Correctly handle
TEST_UNIT_READY failure
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 05:46:52PM -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
> --- a/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
> @@ -1023,6 +1023,13 @@ static void storvsc_handle_error(struct vmscsi_request *vm_srb,
> case ATA_12:
> set_host_byte(scmnd, DID_PASSTHROUGH);
> break;
> + /*
> + * On Some Windows hosts TEST_UNIT_READY command can return
> + * SRB_STATUS_ERROR, let the upper level code deal with it
> + * based on the sense information.
> + */
> + case TEST_UNIT_READY:
> + break;
Don't we need to set an error in the command for the error handler to
take action? Or is this propagated elsewhere?
--
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