Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 17 2005, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Thu, Mar 17 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 16 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Jens Axboe wrote:
On Wed
Re-sending this as an attachment due to copy/paste mangling between
firefox and gmail.
(If anybody knows how to work around this, let me know)
The attached patch updates the driver for the 3ware 5/6/7/8000 series to do
the following:
- Increase max ioctl buffer size to 512 sectors.
- Make tw_scsi
This patch adds some files into the /sys/class/scsi_host/hostN
directories for aacraid adapters. The file names are pretty much self-
explanitory:
aac_driver_version: Driver version and date
aac_bios_version: Adapter's bios version
aac_kernel_version: Adapter's kernel version
aac_monitor_version
Hello,
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
[...]
can you advise users what RAID
/ Storage vendors to use? ie what quality vendors support Linux?
LSI and 3ware for example do provide frequent driver updates, working
managment tools and cooperate with the linux community very well.
Hmmm, can't say something abo
Hello,
Salyzyn, Mark wrote:
> [...]
note that if adaptec simply opensourced their managment tools we wouldn't
have this problem at all. I wonder why Adaptec did that for the old
i2o-based controllers but not aacraid.
Oh yes, that, worked hard on the powers-that-be to permit this. Could
not releas
On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 19:38 -0800, adam radford wrote:
> This patch updates the driver for the 3ware 5/6/7/8000 series to do
> the following:
This one got mangled by your mailer ... (looks like it broke long
lines). Could you resend?
Thanks,
James
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the lin
On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 11:05 +0800, Zhao, Forrest wrote:
> Let me tell you the testing experience in our lab:
> 1 we install kernel 2.6.11.2 on a Tiger4 platform,
> 2 there're two SCSI disks, one is sda for root fs, the other is sdb for
> /mnt
> 3 execute "cp -r /usr/src/linux-2.6.11.2 /mnt"
> 4 d
Now you've gone and done it Christoph! ;-}
Christoph Hellwig writes:
> legacy of Adaptec's non linux-supporting past.
Cry with me for a moment... We all know that certification is the real
issue here, most Penguins scoff at this requirement, but customers
expect it none-the-less and pull us throu
Hi all,
the attached patch tries to fix SATA ATAPI error handling.
The original code invokes scsi_finish_command() regardless whether this
command is processed normally or by scsi_eh.
This looks quite dangerous to me as this might trigger a recovery for a
command which already is in recovery (as i
On Wed, Mar 23 2005, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> Hello, James.
>
> James Bottomley wrote:
> >On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 11:14 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >
> >>01_scsi_remove_scsi_release_buffers.patch
> >>
> >>Buffer bouncing hasn't been done inside the scsi midlayer for
> >>quite sometime now, but b
On Wed, Mar 23 2005, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 08:19 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > It is not the oops I am getting. When I get a few minutes today, I'll
> > reproduce with vanilla and post it here.
>
> Well, I have news too. Unfortunately, the python script I posted is
> hangi
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 08:19 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> It is not the oops I am getting. When I get a few minutes today, I'll
> reproduce with vanilla and post it here.
Well, I have news too. Unfortunately, the python script I posted is
hanging in D wait. When I tested all of this out (with a sim
On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 23:22 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> volatile is almost always (a) buggy, or (b) hiding bugs. At the very
> least, barriers are usually needed.
The choice is either barrier or volatile usually. volatile is nasty
primarily because it causes compiler pessimism in variable reloa
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 13:50 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Well, but it's because scsi midlayer calls back into usb-storage eh
> after the detaching process is complete.
Yes, but that's legitimate. It's always been explicitly stated that we
can't ensure absolute synchronisation in the stack: stora
On 03/22/2005 04:59:48 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Thanks to both the Coverity checker and GNU gcc, it was found that this
> variable is completely unused.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
And it is so obvious when your attention is drawn to it.
The code that did use it moved to o
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 12:43:50PM -0500, Salyzyn, Mark wrote:
> No, this shows that you have no interest in supporting legacy
> applications
legacy of Adaptec's non linux-supporting past.
note that if adaptec simply opensourced their managment tools we wouldn't
have this problem at all. I wonde
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 04:32:04PM -, Ross Macintyre wrote:
> Since you advise us to stay away from Adaptec, and I assume you are part
> of the team that manages the Fedora system,
I'm not associated with Fedora at all.
> can you advise users what RAID
> / Storage vendors to use? ie what qual
On Wed, Mar 23 2005, Rajat Jain, Noida wrote:
>
>
> Thanks lk.
>
> It cleared a lot of things.
>
> How ever, what I am wondering is:
>
> - Does each device queue have a corresponding thread that is woken up when
> it is time to call the request function? And the request function is called
>
There would be a single work queue (kblockd) for all block
devices on which deffered work of different block
device queues will be queued after the unplug_timer.
- Original Message -
From: "Rajat Jain, Noida" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "lk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; ;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent:
Hi Seokmann
(B
(BHaruo> The race issue seem to be in latest megaraid_mbox 2.20.4.5.
(BHaruo> I think that I make adapter->quiescent illegal by megaraid_isr() and
(BHaruo> megaraid_mbox_mm_done().
(B
(BI think that patch is almost OK.
(BIt works with Express5800(4way) without trouble.
(
Hi,
James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 11:14 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
So, basically, SCSI high-level object (scsi_disk) and
mid-level object (scsi_device) are reference counted by users,
not the requests they submit. Reference count cannot go zero
with act
Thanks lk.
It cleared a lot of things.
How ever, what I am wondering is:
- Does each device queue have a corresponding thread that is woken up when
it is time to call the request function? And the request function is called
in the context of this thread?
- I explored and found that there is
This is my understanding.
scsi_request_fn is the scsi's request function which performs the actual
data
transfer. clean up the queue and loop back to fetch next request.
About the Question:WHEN and HOW is the strategy routine "scsi_request_fn()"
called ?
Every request queue have a few members to
23 matches
Mail list logo
