From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C024C43461 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 07:58:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17336218AC for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 07:58:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730043AbgIHH6k (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2020 03:58:40 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:54036 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729956AbgIHH54 (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2020 03:57:56 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41CD8B6CD; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 07:57:55 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 09:57:53 +0200 From: Daniel Wagner To: Arun Easi Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nilesh Javali , Martin Wilck Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] qla2xxx: Handle incorrect entry_type entries Message-ID: <20200908075753.ov64u2rmhet3jmlu@beryllium.lan> References: <20200831161854.70879-1-dwagner@suse.de> <20200831161854.70879-5-dwagner@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Arun, On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 11:47:48PM -0700, Arun Easi wrote: > Could you drop the above comment about firmware, as it is speculation at > this point? Sure, no problem. > It'd be best to take a chip reset path, rather than assuming the > packet is good and having the appropriate handler called (hacky). > An approach similar to the one done at the beginning of > qla2x00_get_sp_from_handle() is what I had in mind. Ok, agreed a reset is probably the safest choice. > I'd have preferred a common approach across the different IOCB types > as an attempt to harden the code, but that will be a little more > involved work. This looks ok. Yes, I was pondering on it but I don't know enough to really come up with something reasonable. Currently our customers report only this hickup. So this is really only a partial workaround. Thanks, Daniel