On 07/13/2015 06:18 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 11.07.2015 um 03:05 hat John Snow geschrieben: >> We're supposed to abort on transfers like this, unless we fill >> Word 125 of our IDENTIFY data with a default transfer size, which >> we don't currently do. >> >> This is an ATA error, not a SCSI/ATAPI one. >> See ATA8-ACS3 sections 7.17.6.49 or 7.21.5. >> >> If we don't do this, QEMU will loop forever trying to transfer >> zero bytes, which isn't particularly useful. >> >> Signed-off-by: John Snow <js...@redhat.com> > > Of course, one could argue that for a clean separation between the ATA > core and SCSI/ATAPI, this check should really be done in cmd_packet and > ide_abort_command() could stay static. And in fact, I do think it's > worthwhile to try getting a better separation in the mid term. > > However, for a 2.4 fix, this patch might be the right thing to do. > > The interesting part is that the SCSI command is already partially > handled before the error is returned. The required assumption here is > that the guest doesn't actually see any intermediate state between > issuing the command and getting the abort, so it doesn't notice that we > already started the command successfully. I _think_ that assumption > holds true. > > Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> >
Ping -- Do you still feel it's necessary we perform the abort in the IDE layer? This requires us to peek into the CDB and determine if the CDB will (or will not) transfer any data. Is that sane? Is that worse than exporting ide_abort_command into the ATAPI layer? Pretty much either way, the ATA bits need to know about the SCSI packet, or the ATAPI bits need to invoke core ATA functionality. It's sort of gross, since the spec unfortunately allows for this field to be zero if the command does not transfer data. :( --js
