From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 16 20:31:18 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EB131065676 for ; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:31:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aboyer@averesystems.com) Received: from zimbra.averesystems.com (75-149-8-243-Pennsylvania.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [75.149.8.243]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 521C98FC18 for ; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:31:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.averesystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D09018BC916; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:31:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at averesystems.com Received: from zimbra.averesystems.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.averesystems.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jkmy+WNuWp6e; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:31:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from riven.arriad.com (fw.arriad.com [10.0.0.16]) by zimbra.averesystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 997318BC915; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:31:50 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Andrew Boyer In-Reply-To: <4C1930BF.3090408@feral.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:31:14 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <51DD9715-89B2-4058-A4FE-7097603013CC@averesystems.com> <4C1930BF.3090408@feral.com> To: Matthew Jacob X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078) Cc: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Overlapped Commands error X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:31:18 -0000 On Jun 16, 2010, at 4:14 PM, Matthew Jacob wrote: >> Can anyone point me to where in the stack the command identifier is = assigned? I see where MPT assigns tags in target mode, but it's the = initiator in this case. Any advice? >=20 > The mpt f/w assigns tags. Don't really know what happened here. >=20 >> Also, is CAM doing the right thing by retrying? scsi_error_action() = in cam/scsi/scsi_all.c always sets the retry bit on aborted commands, = even though the spec quoted above makes it sound like this should be a = fatal error ("This is considered a catastrophic failure on the part of = the SCSI initiator device"). Should scsi_error_action() be looking at = the Additional Sense Code? >=20 > Not really, IMO. It's up to each periph driver to decide whether = commands are statefull or can be retried with impunity. >=20 OK. Thank you for looking into it. -Andrew -------------------------------------------------- Andrew Boyer aboyer@averesystems.com