Hey MNC & Co,

On Wed, 2017-06-28 at 12:44 -0500, Mike Christie wrote:
> On 06/28/2017 12:58 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> > If the user request handler completed the request with a CHECK CONDITION
> > status, tcmu_handle_completion() copies the command entry sense data
> > into the session request structure sense data. However, the sense data
> > length indicated by the field scsi_sense_length is not set and equal to
> > 0, resulting in the copy being a no-op and failure to propagate the
> > sense data back to the initiator. To fix this, properly set the session
> > command sense data length and also set the session command
> > SCF_TRANSPORT_TASK_SENSE flag to indicate that the command has valid
> > sense data.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lem...@wdc.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/target/target_core_user.c | 4 +++-
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/target/target_core_user.c 
> > b/drivers/target/target_core_user.c
> > index beb5f09..7426b4c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/target/target_core_user.c
> > +++ b/drivers/target/target_core_user.c
> > @@ -831,7 +831,9 @@ static void tcmu_handle_completion(struct tcmu_cmd 
> > *cmd, struct tcmu_cmd_entry *
> >             entry->rsp.scsi_status = SAM_STAT_CHECK_CONDITION;
> >     } else if (entry->rsp.scsi_status == SAM_STAT_CHECK_CONDITION) {
> >             memcpy(se_cmd->sense_buffer, entry->rsp.sense_buffer,
> > -                          se_cmd->scsi_sense_length);
> > +                  TRANSPORT_SENSE_BUFFER);
> > +           se_cmd->scsi_sense_length = TRANSPORT_SENSE_BUFFER;
> > +           se_cmd->se_cmd_flags |= SCF_TRANSPORT_TASK_SENSE;
> >     } else if (se_cmd->se_cmd_flags & SCF_BIDI) {
> >             /* Get Data-In buffer before clean up */
> >             gather_data_area(udev, cmd, true);
> > 
> 
> I have a patch similar to this and 5/5 in my set:
> 
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/target-devel/msg15430.html
> 
> If yours gets merged first then I will build my set over them, so patch
> looks ok to me.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Mike Christie <mchri...@redhat.com>

The RFC patches above from May 31st weren't merged because I thought you
where going to send out a second series..

https://www.spinics.net/lists/target-devel/msg15505.html

Since that hasn't been the case, I'll go ahead and merge the bugfixes in
patches #1-6 for v4.13 now.  :)

Please resend patches #7-13 as post v4.13 items at your earliest
convenience.

Apologies for the confusion.

Reply via email to