Re: SCSI testing/USB devices are amazing

[Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@interlog.com>]

On 13-05-17 07:53 PM, ronnie sahlberg wrote:
> Martin,
> Thansk for your suggestions.
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Martin K. Petersen
> <martin.petersen@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Ronnie" == ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlberg@gmail.com> writes:
> ...
>> Ronnie> I have added tests for the block limits VPD as
>> Ronnie> SCSI.Inquiry.InquiryBlockLimits.  It checks that the pagelength
>> Ronnie> is valid. 3C if SBC3 is claimed and 0C if prior to SBC3.
>>
>> Well, there are devices out there that claim SPC3/SBC2 compliance but do
>> support some of the newer features from SPC4/SBC3.
>>
>> In this case I'd rely on the supported VPD page list. And if the BL VPD
>> is present and the device reports SPC3/SBC2 I'd print a warning.
>
> I have updated the tests so that IF the device claims SBC-3 then the
> SBC-3 page of pagelength 0x3c must be present.
> If the device is not SBC-3, then I allow either the SBC-2 version of
> the page that is 0x0c in length OR the SBC-3 version.
>
> If the device returns a SBC-3 style page without claiming SBC-3
> support I print a warning but allow the test to pass.
>
> This is now part of the test  --test SCSI.Inquiry.InquiryBlockLimits
>
>> Ronnie> The other fields I had a hard time to come up with good sanity
>> Ronnie> tests for. Any suggestions ?  Do you have examples of things
>> Ronnie> that vendors get wrong here ?
>>
>> Maximum Write Same Length vs. support for WS10 and WS16.
>>
>> Another interesting Write Same test: I have several devices that support
>> WS16 but which only support a 2-byte block count in WS16. I.e. you get
>> the larger LBA but not a bigger block count with WS16.
>
> I have added tests to verify that WS16 supports >16 bit block count.
> I also added tests that both WS10 and WS16 support >8 bit block counts.
>
> These are part of:
>
> --test SCSI.WriteSame10.WriteSame10Unmap
> --test SCSI.WriteSame16.WriteSame16Unmap
>
>
> Could you check if these tests catch the devices that you have that
> had problem in this area?
>
>
>>
>> There's also the Logical Block Provisioning VPD page. You could verify
>> that UNMAP is supported when LBPU=1. Repeat for LBPWS and LBPWS10.
>
> I added tests that IF UNMAP works, then both LBPU and LPBME must be clear.
> Analog for WS10/WS16.
>
> If either of them does not work, then I check that the corresponding
> LBPU/LBPWS10/LBPWS flags are clear.
>
> This is tested in
> --test SCSI.Unmap.UnmapVPD
> --test SCSI.WriteSame10.WriteSame10UnmapVPD
> --test SCSI.WriteSame16.WriteSame16UnmapVPD
>>
>> You could verify that the device actually returns zeroes when LBPRZ=1.
>
> Tested in
> --test SCSI.Unmap.Unmap
> --test SCSI.WriteSame10.WriteSame10Unmap
> --test SCSI.WriteSame16.WriteSame16Unmap
>
>
>>
>>
>> Ronnie> I will add tests for when protection information is enabled in
>> Ronnie> the future, I will need to find time to add it to tgt first.
>>
>> I have a fairly extensive set of PI tests in my test suite. But that
>> gets pretty involved. We can deal with those later.
>
> I would love to implement those tests in my testsuite,  but that is
> probably not near future since I would have to add support for PI to
> both wireshark and tgtd first.
>
>
>
> Other tests you would like to see in the test tool ?

Hi,
If you are working in the WRITE SAME (WS) area, you could make
this addition: T10/Robert Elliott just added a NDOB bit
('no data-out buffer') to WS(16) and WS(32) in sbc3r35d.pdf .

Using it vastly simplifies my sg_write_same code but I don't
understand why NDOB=1,UNMAP=0 is disallowed.

Doug Gilbert