Mike Christie wrote:
> Mike Christie wrote:
>> Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>>> Sigh. Why do you have to make is so complicated ...
>>> My patch was easy and simple originally. And now this :-)
>>>
>> This gets really ugly if we do it in libiscsi_tcp. I moved the check to 
>> libiscsi and I changed the abort task test to check for the rtt since 
>> that works for data outs. I think the attached patch will do what you 
>> wanted. It is only compile tested.
>>
> 
> Bah. The lun and itt is not set for scsi cmd pdus. This should fix it.
> 
> For the lu reset and requeue (r2t data-out handling) or scsi cmd case, 
> the task sc lun is always going to be set.
> 
> For the abort and requeue or cmd case, we only need to check the itt/rtt 
> for data outs when doing a abort task (the requeue case), because the 
> cmd has already been sent (iscsi_eh_abort checks for it on the cmd queue 
> before sending) so there is no point to check at that point (also the 
> itt is not set for scsi cmd pdus yet).
> 
> It might be nicer to move the restrictions check after the prep scsi cmd 
> pdu call but you need the cmdsn scsi_prep_scsi_cmd_pdu patch I sent the 
> other day.
> 

The problem with this patch and your original one is that we are trying 
to allow IO not affected by the TMF to run and stop other IO, but if we 
fail the tmf check, we leave the task at the head of the list or on 
conn->task so no new IO ends up getting sent, and it is just like the 
old code with this patch 
http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi/attach/06a36581734df5ab/dont-exec-on-success.patch?part=2&view=1
which is a lot more simple.

How much complexity do we want to add?

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"open-iscsi" group.
To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
open-iscsi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to