From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Anderson Subject: Re: Need help with another aic94xx sequencer problem Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:58:20 -0700 Message-ID: <20060822235820.GA19794@us.ibm.com> References: <1156278519.19615.31.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> <20060822205315.GA16638@us.ibm.com> <1156286656.21487.0.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from e6.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.146]:49592 "EHLO e6.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750747AbWHVX7u (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:59:50 -0400 Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e6.ny.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k7MNxkEe029082 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:59:46 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/NCO v8.1.1) with ESMTP id k7MNxmY2275044 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:59:49 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k7MNxmqU020747 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:59:48 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1156286656.21487.0.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: "Tarte, Robert" , "Hammer, Jack" , linux-scsi James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 13:53 -0700, Mike Anderson wrote: > > Does this help any? While Alexis and I where working on a expander timeout > > issue the abort was never working for us. I compared the adp abort and the > > aic94xx abort code and made these changes. This appears to make the abort > > work for us now. A few lines of the changes are not related to the abort. > > YMMV, a better solution would be to know the exact format of the abort. > > Actually, no. I still seem to get the same problem (at least it BUGs in > the same place ... I haven't dug down to see if I'm getting the same > return value). Well the adp driver had a comment that the 0x1D error code means that it cannot find the command in its execution queue as it already has sent the command to the target(if I mapped this right between the two drivers). What looks odd is in the adp driver that move to a higher level of recovery (i.e., lun reset) if they receive this code, but in the aic94xx we mark the task TMF_RESP_FUNC_COMPLETE which appears wrong as you found out with the BUG_ON. -andmike -- Michael Anderson andmike@us.ibm.com