Hello,
Here is a patch for megaraid_mbox 2.20.4.3 and megaraid_mm 2.20.2.5.
The patch includes following changes/fixes
- sysfs support for drive addition/removal
- Tape drive timeout issue
- Made some code static
I am attaching and inlining the patch.
Thank you.
Seokmann
LSI Logic
---
diff -N
Thanks for the suggestion. After more exploration, looks like different
distribution have different implementations for /sbin/hotplug. This may
aggravate the issue for applications. For now, we will stick with a wait and
watch after bus scan :-(
Will probe the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list for more
point
Ok, now my head is starting to hurt! :)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ming Zhang
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 4:04 PM
To: Guy
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Stephen Hemminger'; 'S Iremonger';
linux-net@vger.kernel.org; linux-scsi
Subject: RE
I can easily disable the them. However, I won't sign up for dealing
with this change in the other FC drivers as it could be rather
extensive. A patch to back out the attributes would disable FC
transport support in the other drivers. Their maintainers would need
to re-add support.
-- james s
Chr
Patch against latest scsi rc fixes.
Change scsi send/completion logging back to terser output:
print_command was renamed __scsi_print_command, but two print_command
calls were renamed to scsi_print_command rather than __scsi_print_command.
__scsi_print_command at one time did not print KERN_INFO
On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 11:26:00AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > This sounds like a good idea, but I wonder if we have userland relying
> > on those attributes already. But given that the fc transport class
> > was mostly a joke before you encehanced it it might be worth breaking
> > it..
>
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 12:37 -0800, Mike Christie wrote:
> Will do. One question though. If a function like
> transport_add_device or transport_setup_device fails,
> how does the caller detect this?
It doesn't; the system runs degraded.
James
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsub
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 15:16, Guy wrote:
> Great! Now you can have ISCSI over SCSI! :)
u can have iscsi over scsi over iscsi!
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 2:07 PM
> To: Steph
James Bottomley wrote:
On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 02:39 -0800, Mike Christie wrote:
The attached patch built against scsi-misc-2.6 moves the
target iSCSI attributes to a new structure representing
a iSCSI session. The reason for doing this is to
create a interface that allows the Sourceforge iSCSI drive
Great! Now you can have ISCSI over SCSI! :)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 2:07 PM
To: Stephen Hemminger
Cc: S Iremonger; linux-net@vger.kernel.org; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 11:01:13AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:19:12 + (GMT)
> S Iremonger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > For some purposes at the moment, working IP-over-SCSI could be rather
> > handy... ;-).
>
> You probably are looking for:
> htt
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:19:12 + (GMT) S Iremonger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > For some purposes at the moment, working IP-over-SCSI could be rather
> > handy... ;-).
>
> You probably are looking for:
> http://linux-iscsi.sour
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 14:01, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:19:12 + (GMT)
> S Iremonger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > For some purposes at the moment, working IP-over-SCSI could be rather
> > handy... ;-).
>
> You probably are looking for:
> http://linux-isc
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:19:12 + (GMT)
S Iremonger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> For some purposes at the moment, working IP-over-SCSI could be rather
> handy... ;-).
You probably are looking for:
http://linux-iscsi.sourceforge.net/
--
Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
This is mostly simple updates. There is one new feature: the move over
to generic transport classes. This doesn't impact anything other than
SCSI (although the idea is that it will in future) but it does introduce
new abstractions in drivers/base (which I got Greg's sign off on).
The patch is av
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 19:10 +0100, Martin Peschke3 wrote:
> Actually, you will find the adapter structure be an anchor for several
> other objects, or lists of them respectively. We tried to organize
> all the driver private data in a sane way. That means there is a tree
> of objects representing t
Hi,
I have recently bought an Adaptec 2410SA raid controller and I am having
some IO performance difficulties. Basically, whenever I access the
configured RAID5 logical device the CPU appears to be spending most of it's
time in the 'iowait' state (I am running 'top' and the 'wa' figure shoots up
James,
both Heiko and Andreas aren't available for several days.
Let me try to answer your questions.
> You're look to be breaking the simplicity rules. Object lifetimes are
> very tricky things to manage, so what I want you to explain is why you
> have to make this more difficult buy making
Atul -
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 11:27:36AM -0500, Mukker, Atul wrote:
> After writing the "- - -" to the scan attribute, the management applications
> assume the udev has created the relevant entries in the /dev directly and
> try to use the devices _immediately_ and fail to see the devices
>
> Is
>
> > After the new logical drives are created with "- - -" written to the
> > scsi_host scan attribute, there is a highly noticeable delay before
> device
> > names (e.g., sda) appears in the /dev directory. If the management
> > application tried to access the device immediately after creating n
For some purposes at the moment, working IP-over-SCSI could be rather
handy... ;-).
I can see some project(s) for this but I am not sure which actaully
work. Many seem to want to have a particular SCSI board
In short, I am stuck with a particular SCSI board in some machine(s)
(e.g. 'pi
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 07:08 +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > Originally this generic device was part of your adapter structure. Now
> > you're trying to separate it and causing these problems. What it's
>
> Could you please elaborate where this patch does cause a problem?
You're look to be brea
This patch makes some needlessly global code static.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/scsi/ips.c | 244 ++---
drivers/scsi/ips.h | 12 --
2 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 133 deletions(-)
This patch was already sent on:
-
This patch makes 4 needlessly global functions static.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/scsi/psi240i.c |8
drivers/scsi/psi240i.h |4
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
This patch was already sent on:
- 15 Nov 2004
--- linux-2.6.10
24 matches
Mail list logo
