Il 25/11/2013 11:34, Peter Lieven ha scritto:
>> @@ -1012,6 +1018,14 @@ retry:
>> }
>> if (iTask.status != SCSI_STATUS_GOOD) {
>> + if (iTask.status == SCSI_STATUS_CHECK_CONDITION &&
>> + iTask.task->sense.key == SCSI_SENSE_ILLEGAL_REQUEST &&
>> + iTask.task->sense.ascq ==
>> SCSI_SENSE_ASCQ_INVALID_OPERATION_CODE) {
>> + /* WRITE SAME is not supported by the target */
>> + iscsilun->has_write_same = false;
>> + return -ENOTSUP;
>> + }
>> +
>> return -EIO;
>> }
>> @@ -1375,6 +1389,7 @@ static int iscsi_open(BlockDriverState *bs,
>> QDict *options, int flags,
>> }
>> iscsilun->type = inq->periperal_device_type;
>> + iscsilun->has_write_same = true;
>> if ((ret = iscsi_readcapacity_sync(iscsilun)) != 0) {
>> goto out;
>
> Maybe the naming has_write_same is misleading. It might be better to call
> it try_write_same or has_write_same_failed with inverse logic.
I was using the same names as block/raw-posix.c. I'm not sure I like
the other names, but if the maintainers prefer them I'll gladly change them.
Paolo
