lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: scanning for LUNs
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Bottomley [mailto:jbottomley@parallels.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 11:15 AM
> To: KY Srinivasan
> Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> devel@linuxdriverproject.org; ohering@suse.com; hch@infradead.org; linux-
> scsi@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: scanning for LUNs
>
> On Thu, 2013-04-04 at 08:12 -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
> > Here is the code snippet for scanning LUNS (drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c in function
> > __scsi_scan_target()):
> >
> > /*
> > * Scan LUN 0, if there is some response, scan further. Ideally, we
> > * would not configure LUN 0 until all LUNs are scanned.
> > */
> > res = scsi_probe_and_add_lun(starget, 0, &bflags, NULL, rescan, NULL);
> > if (res == SCSI_SCAN_LUN_PRESENT || res ==
> SCSI_SCAN_TARGET_PRESENT) {
> > if (scsi_report_lun_scan(starget, bflags, rescan) != 0)
> >
> >
> > So, if we don't get a response while scanning LUN0, we will not use
> > scsi_report_lun_scan().
> > On Hyper-V, the scsi emulation on the host does not treat LUN0 as
> > anything special and we
> > could have situations where the only device under a scsi controller is
> > at a location other than 0
> > or 1. In this case the standard LUN scanning code in Linux fails to
> > detect this device. Is this
> > behaviour expected? Why is LUN0 treated differently here. Looking at
> > the scsi spec, I am not sure
> > if this is what is specified. Any help/guidance will be greatly
> > appreciated.
>
> Why don't you describe the problem. We can't scan randomly a bunch of
> LUNs hoping for a response (the space is 10^19). SAM thinks you use
> LUNW for this, but that's not well supported. We can't annoy USB
> devices by probing with REPORT LUNS, so conventionally most arrays
> return something for LUN0 even if they don't actually have one (That's
> what the peripheral qualifier codes are supposed to be about). We
> translate PQ1 and PQ2 to SCSI_SCAN_TARGET_PRESENT, which means no LUN,
> but there is a target to scan here.
>
> If you're sending back an error to an INQUIRY to LUN0, then you're out
> of spec. The SCSI standards say:
>
> SPC3 6.4.1: In response to an INQUIRY command received by an
> incorrect logical unit, the SCSI target device shall return the
> INQUIRY data with the peripheral qualifier set to the value
> defined in 6.4.2. The INQUIRY command shall return CHECK
> CONDITION status only when the device server is unable to return
> the requested INQUIRY data

Thanks James. I will further investigate the issue on our platform.

Regards,

K. Y
>
> James
>
>
> James
>
>




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-04-04 20:01    [W:0.050 / U:4.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site