From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin K. Petersen" Subject: Re: [RFC] Simlify dif_verify routines and fixup fileio protection information code. Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 12:10:53 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1428945575-30839-1-git-send-email-sagig@mellanox.com> <552D4C7B.9000402@dev.mellanox.co.il> <552E384F.3030203@dev.mellanox.co.il> <552E76D1.7040204@dev.mellanox.co.il> <552E7ED6.4080304@dev.mellanox.co.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: <552E7ED6.4080304@dev.mellanox.co.il> (Sagi Grimberg's message of "Wed, 15 Apr 2015 18:08:06 +0300") Sender: target-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Sagi Grimberg Cc: Akinobu Mita , "Nicholas A. Bellinger" , target-devel@vger.kernel.org, "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "Martin K. Petersen" , Christoph Hellwig List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org >>>>> "Sagi" == Sagi Grimberg writes: >>> By the commit 436f4a0a ("loopback: Add fabric_prot_type attribute >>> support"), When WRITE_SAME command with WRPROTECT=0 is executed, >>> sbc_dif_generate() is called but cmd->t_prot_sg is NULL as block >>> layer didn't allocate it for WRITE_SAME. Sagi> Actually this is a bug. Why didn't the initiator allocate Sagi> integrity meta-data for WRITE_SAME? Looking at the code it looks Sagi> like it should. We don't issue WRITE SAME with PI so there is no prot SGL. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering