------- Comment From [email protected] 2022-04-06 09:24 EDT-------
(In reply to comment #76)
> I can confirm that just on the patch-level only two need backporting, the
> rest applies as is and I have regenerated them to match the packaging
> requirements. The backport-adaptations themselves are minimal.
>
> From the content I guess it is complex enough that nobody can be fully sure.
> I'm still reading it ...
>
> Until then a few questions:
> - I wonder if we'd also want/need dc293f6 "scsi: fix sense code for
> EREMOTEIO" (to ensure this kind of ioerror gets to the guest as well) - what
> do you think?
> - I also wondered about 424740d "scsi-disk: do not complete requests early
> for rerror/werror=ignore" but we do not have 40dce4ee applied so that should
> be ok

I have nothing against including those. I was under the impression that
a minimal fix is desired, and my tests indicate that dose patches are
not strictly necessary.

Generally I think that those are good patches, and having them is better
than not having them. But then I hope most of the patches are good
patches, and obviously backporting all the good patches is not very
practicable -- hence the principle of minimality.

It is just my two cents. My understanding of SCSI is quite poor.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1967814

Title:
  Ubuntu 20.04.3 - ilzlnx3g1 - virtio-scsi devs on KVM guest having
  miscompares on disktests when there is a failed path.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-z-systems/+bug/1967814/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to