On Wed, Jan 30, Olaf Hering wrote:
> Is there a way to not use WRITE_SAME at all? While browsing the code its
> not clear if there is a conditional for this command.
It seems scsi_device->no_write_same may avoid this command, I will
test this patch:
# Subject: [PATCH] scsi: storvsc: avoid usage of WRITE_SAME
Set scsi_device->no_write_same because the host does not support it.
Also blacklist WRITE_SAME to avoid (and log) accident usage.
Signed-off-by: Olaf Hering <o...@aepfle.de>
---
drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c b/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
index 0144078..21f788a 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
@@ -1155,6 +1155,8 @@ static int storvsc_device_configure(struct scsi_device
*sdevice)
blk_queue_bounce_limit(sdevice->request_queue, BLK_BOUNCE_ANY);
+ sdevice->no_write_same = 1;
+
return 0;
}
@@ -1241,6 +1243,7 @@ static bool storvsc_scsi_cmd_ok(struct scsi_cmnd *scmnd)
* smartd sends this command and the host does not handle
* this. So, don't send it.
*/
+ case WRITE_SAME:
case SET_WINDOW:
scmnd->result = ILLEGAL_REQUEST << 16;
allowed = false;
--
1.8.1.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
