From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] mptsas: Fixed code to check whether the LU type is SSC or not for SILI bit in READ_6 and READ_16 CDB Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 18:43:20 -0600 Message-ID: <1331081000.3226.37.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> References: <201203060645.q266jR8Y026994@milmhbs0.lsil.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:43602 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756654Ab2CGAnW (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2012 19:43:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: <201203060645.q266jR8Y026994@milmhbs0.lsil.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: nagalakshmi.nandigama@lsi.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi On Tue, 2012-03-06 at 12:16 +0530, nagalakshmi.nandigama@lsi.com wrote: > This SILI bit (suppress incorrect length indicator) is defined only for SSC > READ(6) and READ(16) commands. For other device types bit is part of LBA This isn't right ... it is for READ(6) but it's FUA_NV for READ(10,12,16) on block devices. > field. In the current implementation, it is not checked whether the logical > unit is a SSC device. > > > Added code for checking the LU type is SSC for SILI bit in READ_6 and READ_16 CDB I still don't have a description of what you think the actual bug is. I think the problem is that strict block length checking is accidentally turned off if FUA_NV is set on a block device (which currently doesn't happen in practise ... nor do we ever really use READ_6 for block devices) ... is that it? James