On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 10:51 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 11:11:50PM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > > On Sat, 2012-10-06 at 21:49 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Currenly all non-pscsi bakcneds report their standards version as > > > SPC 2 via ->get_device_rev. > > > > No, the proper on-the-wire bits to signal SPC-3 compliance are already > > being returned by virtual backend drivers within standard INQUIRY > > payload data. > > I missed that, but it doesn't matter for the point I was making, which > is the code to special case the SCSI_2 case, which can't happen for > any virtual backend.
Regardless of if an virtual backend reports a SPC-3 version (0x05) in INQUIRY response, an initiator is still allowed to fall back to using legacy SCSI-2 reservations instead of SPC-3 persistent reservations. I can think of at least one mainstream SCSI initiator that does this. Also, I think your mistaken about ALUA and SCSI-2 compatibility. ALUA is an SPC-3 and above specific feature. > In addition it also can't happen for pscsi as > we don't wire up any command emulation but REPORT LUNS for it any more, > effectively making it dead code. > pSCSI has always NOP'ed the reservation + ALUA function pointers within core_setup_reservations() and core_setup_alua(). --nab -- 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
