From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH] sd: do not set changed flag on all unit attention conditions Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 19:20:22 +0200 Message-ID: <50044D56.6000400@redhat.com> References: <1342454772-9018-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1342455503.3176.42.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-we0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:47717 "EHLO mail-we0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751808Ab2GPRU1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jul 2012 13:20:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1342455503.3176.42.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Il 16/07/2012 18:18, James Bottomley ha scritto: >> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c >> > index b583277..6d8ca08 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c >> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c >> > @@ -843,8 +843,11 @@ void scsi_io_completion(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd, unsigned int good_bytes) >> > } else if (sense_valid && !sense_deferred) { >> > switch (sshdr.sense_key) { >> > case UNIT_ATTENTION: >> > - if (cmd->device->removable) { >> > - /* Detected disc change. Set a bit >> > + if (cmd->device->removable && >> > + (sshdr.asc == 0x3a || >> > + (sshdr.asc == 0x28 && sshdr.ascq == 0x00))) { >> > + /* "No medium" or "Medium may have changed." >> > + * This means a disc change. Set a bit > This type of change would likely cause a huge cascade of errors in real > removable media devices. Under the MMC standards, which a lot of the > older removable discs seem to follow, UNIT ATTENTION indicates either > medium change or device reset (which we check for and eat lower down); > we can't rely on them giving proper SBC-2 sense codes. If you want to > pretend to be removable media, you have to conform to its standards. Would you accept a patch doing the opposite, i.e. passing some sense codes such as PARAMETERS CHANGED and TARGET OPERATING CONDITIONS HAVE CHANGED? Paolo