On Mon, 19 Oct 2026 10:33:07 +0900, Daejun Park wrote: > UFSHCI reports a data buffer that is too small with OCS MISMATCH DATA > BUFFER SIZE, so the status belongs to ufs.c. ufs.c does not parse the > CDB, though; the LU does, in scsi_req_new(). In v3 the LU would pass > the transfer length to ufs.c, and ufs.c would fail the request with > that OCS when the PRDT is smaller, before scsi-hd sees it and with the > write pointer unchanged. Would that split work for you?
Yes, that split sounds good to me. Thanks. Stanley
