On 22/10/2015 11:51, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > >
> > > +switch (sense->key) {
> > > +case SCSI_SENSE_NO_SENSE:
> > > +return 0;
> > > +break;
> > > +case SCSI_SENSE_NOT_READY:
> > > +return -EBUSY;
> > > +break;
> > > +case SCSI_SENSE_DATA_PROTECTION:
>
On Thu, 10/22 10:45, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 22/10/2015 10:31, Peter Lieven wrote:
> >
> > +switch (sense->key) {
> > +case SCSI_SENSE_NO_SENSE:
> > +return 0;
> > +break;
> > +case SCSI_SENSE_NOT_READY:
> > +return -EBUSY;
> > +break;
> > +c
Am 22.10.2015 um 10:45 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
On 22/10/2015 10:31, Peter Lieven wrote:
+switch (sense->key) {
+case SCSI_SENSE_NO_SENSE:
+return 0;
+break;
Isn't it dangerous to return 0 (no error) if the status is != SCSI_STATUS_GOOD?
Peter
Am 22.10.2015 um 10:17 hat Fam Zheng geschrieben:
> Previously we return -EIO blindly when anything goes wrong. Add a helper
> function to parse sense fields and try to make the return code more
> meaningful.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng
> ---
> block/iscsi.c | 56 +++
On 22/10/2015 10:31, Peter Lieven wrote:
>
> +switch (sense->key) {
> +case SCSI_SENSE_NO_SENSE:
> +return 0;
> +break;
> +case SCSI_SENSE_NOT_READY:
> +return -EBUSY;
> +break;
> +case SCSI_SENSE_DATA_PROTECTION:
> +return -EACCES;
Probab
Am 22.10.2015 um 10:17 schrieb Fam Zheng:
Previously we return -EIO blindly when anything goes wrong. Add a helper
function to parse sense fields and try to make the return code more
meaningful.
Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng
---
block/iscsi.c | 56 ++
Previously we return -EIO blindly when anything goes wrong. Add a helper
function to parse sense fields and try to make the return code more
meaningful.
Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng
---
block/iscsi.c | 56 +++-
1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 1 d