Re: [Patch 2/4] aacraid: expanded expose physical device code

2007-01-24 Thread Mark Haverkamp 
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 05:49 +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
  +   if ((scsicmd-cmnd[0] == INQUIRY)  (expose_physicals = 0)) {
  +   u8 b;
  +   u8 b1;
  +   /* We can't expose disk devices because we can't
  +* tell whether they are the raw container drives
  +* or stand alone drives.  If they have the removable
  +* bit set then we should expose them though.
  +*/
  +   b = (*(u8*)scsicmd-request_buffer)0x1f;
  +   b1 = ((u8*)scsicmd-request_buffer)[1];
  +   if (b == TYPE_TAPE || b == TYPE_WORM ||
  +   b == TYPE_ROM || b==TYPE_MOD ||
  +   b == TYPE_MEDIUM_CHANGER ||
  +   (b == TYPE_DISK  (b1  0x80))) {
  +   scsicmd-result = DID_OK  16 |
  +   COMMAND_COMPLETE  8;
 
 This can't work at all.  request_buffer is always a scatterlist these days.
 Besides this implementation bug it's also not the wrong way to do it either.
 Please just return -ENXIO in -slave_configure if sdev-type is not to
 your liking instead of failing the INQUIRY command.

Christoph,

I talked to Mark Salyzyn about this.  He wants to drop this patch for
the time being and re-think it.

James,

The other patches still apply with this one removed (One applies with
fuzz).  Is that OK or should I re-diff and resend them.

Mark.

-- 
Mark Haverkamp [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [Patch 2/4] aacraid: expanded expose physical device code

2007-01-24 Thread James Bottomley 
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 08:31 -0800, Mark Haverkamp wrote:
 The other patches still apply with this one removed (One applies with
 fuzz).  Is that OK or should I re-diff and resend them.

That should be fine ... I get large numbers of patches that either apply
with fuzz or even have rejects.

James


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [Patch 2/4] aacraid: expanded expose physical device code

2007-01-23 Thread Christoph Hellwig 
 + if ((scsicmd-cmnd[0] == INQUIRY)  (expose_physicals = 0)) {
 + u8 b;
 + u8 b1;
 + /* We can't expose disk devices because we can't
 +  * tell whether they are the raw container drives
 +  * or stand alone drives.  If they have the removable
 +  * bit set then we should expose them though.
 +  */
 + b = (*(u8*)scsicmd-request_buffer)0x1f;
 + b1 = ((u8*)scsicmd-request_buffer)[1];
 + if (b == TYPE_TAPE || b == TYPE_WORM ||
 + b == TYPE_ROM || b==TYPE_MOD ||
 + b == TYPE_MEDIUM_CHANGER ||
 + (b == TYPE_DISK  (b1  0x80))) {
 + scsicmd-result = DID_OK  16 |
 + COMMAND_COMPLETE  8;

This can't work at all.  request_buffer is always a scatterlist these days.
Besides this implementation bug it's also not the wrong way to do it either.
Please just return -ENXIO in -slave_configure if sdev-type is not to
your liking instead of failing the INQUIRY command.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html