Jeff Garzik wrote:
> * pass Scsi_Host to ips_remove_device() via pci_set_drvdata(),
> allowing us to eliminate the ips_ha[] search loop and call
> ips_release() directly.
>
> * call pci_{request,release}_regions() and eliminate individual
> request/release_[mem_]region() calls
>
> * call pci_
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:25:24 -0600
Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 07:57:55PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 01:21:29 +0900
> > FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > - scsi_tgt_cmd_cache = kmem_cache_create("scsi_tgt_cmd",
> >
James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-10-22 at 13:57 +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 08:50:45AM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
That's what I thought, too. Hence the patch.
But if we set the default to 16 byte cdbs you can of course ignore
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:48:26 -0400 (EDT) Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
drivers/scsi/ips.c | 178
this driver seems a bit of a basket case :(
What's going on here?
scb->dcdb.cmd_attribute =
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:48:26 -0400 (EDT) Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> drivers/scsi/ips.c | 178
>
this driver seems a bit of a basket case :(
What's going on here?
scb->dcdb.cmd_attribute =
i
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 07:57:55PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 01:21:29 +0900
> FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > - scsi_tgt_cmd_cache = kmem_cache_create("scsi_tgt_cmd",
> > - sizeof(struct
> > scsi_tgt_cmd),
> > -
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 01:21:29 +0900
FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/scsi_tgt_lib.c |4 +---
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_tgt_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_
Hi All,
If you all would not mind a post from the general
public Linux user, after doing a complete disk wipe
of CentOS 4 and installing CentOS5, my system is preceived
to be 3 times slower.
To troubleshooting this, I made a post on CentOS's
bugzilla: http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2
Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/scsi/ips.c | 18 +-
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ips.c b/drivers/scsi/ips.c
index fb90b6c..b8e2f5a 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/ips.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/ips.c
@@ -6836,13 +6836
Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/scsi/ips.c | 44 ++--
drivers/scsi/ips.h | 12 ++--
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ips.c b/drivers/scsi/ips.c
index 595a91a..c9f3e1f 100644
* pass Scsi_Host to ips_remove_device() via pci_set_drvdata(),
allowing us to eliminate the ips_ha[] search loop and call
ips_release() directly.
* call pci_{request,release}_regions() and eliminate individual
request/release_[mem_]region() calls
* call pci_disable_device(), paired with pci
Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/scsi/ips.c | 178
drivers/scsi/ips.h | 20 +++
2 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 107 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ips.c b/drivers/scsi/ips.c
index 5c5a9b2..595a91a 100
We are organizing another filesystem and storage workshop in San Jose
next Feb 25 and 26. You can find some great writeups of last year's
conference on LWN:
http://lwn.net/Articles/226351/
This year we're trying to concentrate on more problem solving sessions,
short term projects and joint sessi
On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 12:17 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:59:30 -0700 "Ed Lin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The shared tag issue was not fixed yet. Kernel panic
> > happened while running I/O test in kernel 2.6.23
> > (information attached). After applying the patch I po
On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 15:16 -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 11:59 -0700, Ed Lin wrote:
> > The shared tag issue was not fixed yet. Kernel panic
> > happened while running I/O test in kernel 2.6.23
> > (information attached). After applying the patch I posted
> > (or the versio
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:59:30 -0700 "Ed Lin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The shared tag issue was not fixed yet. Kernel panic
> happened while running I/O test in kernel 2.6.23
> (information attached). After applying the patch I posted
> (or the version James modified), panic disappeared.
> Switc
On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 11:59 -0700, Ed Lin wrote:
> The shared tag issue was not fixed yet. Kernel panic
> happened while running I/O test in kernel 2.6.23
> (information attached). After applying the patch I posted
> (or the version James modified), panic disappeared.
> Switch back to standard kern
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 08:35:21 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, James Bottomley wrote:
> >
> > OK, so it's no secret that I'm the last of the subsystem maintainers
> > whose day job isn't working on the linux kernel. If you want a full
> > time person,
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 12:41:12PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 18:25 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > The Coverity checker noted that we'll anyway Oops later when we ran into
> > this condition - and the error check didn't prevent that.
> >
> > Considering that the error co
On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 18:25 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> The Coverity checker noted that we'll anyway Oops later when we ran into
> this condition - and the error check didn't prevent that.
>
> Considering that the error condition shouldn't be possible, and we are
> not able to handle it easily,
This patch does some additional cleanups after the 53c7xx removal.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Documentation/dontdiff|2
Documentation/m68k/kernel-options.txt | 60 --
Documentation/scsi/00-INDEX |2
Documentat
Not requesting you to test (aacraid), just scoping any effort.
The cards in question are the (old) Dell PERC variety that would trigger
the need. I will notify our Dell liaison to see what they can do.
Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn
> -Original Message-
> From: FUJITA Tomonori [mailto:[EMAIL
After the APUS removal, some code can be removed.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/m68k/amiga/chipram.c |2
drivers/ide/ide-probe.c |8 +--
drivers/isdn/hisax/avm_pci.c|8 ---
drivers/scsi/a2091.c|3 -
drivers
This converts tgt to use the data buffer accessors to reduce the size
of the scsi_data_buffer patch for tgt, which will be merged later.
-
Subject: [PATCH] tgt: convert to use the data buffer accessors
- convert to use the new accessors for the sg lists and the
parameters.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA
The Coverity checker noted that we'll anyway Oops later when we ran into
this condition - and the error check didn't prevent that.
Considering that the error condition shouldn't be possible, and we are
not able to handle it easily, this patch simply removes the pointless
error check.
Signed-of
This patch makes three needlessly global functions static.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/scsi/advansys.c |6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
ad7c16573cd33555f4136c50fa35d1fb2c3669ca
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/advansys.c b/drivers/scsi/adv
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/scsi/scsi_tgt_lib.c |4 +---
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_tgt_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_tgt_lib.c
index deea3cd..7abef1a 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_tgt_lib.c
+++ b/drivers/scs
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:34:23 -0400
"Salyzyn, Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ACK
Thanks.
> Based on the presence of the call. 2.6.22, for instance, does not have
> this capability...
>
> I did not test this change, just accepting on the principals. How much
> testing of the change did you do
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> OK, so it's no secret that I'm the last of the subsystem maintainers
> whose day job isn't working on the linux kernel. If you want a full
> time person, who did you have in mind?
Quite frankly, at least for me personally, what I would rather hav
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:28:10 -0400 James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK, so it's no secret that I'm the last of the subsystem maintainers
> whose day job isn't working on the linux kernel.
For the record, lots of subsystem maintainers are privateers.
I am not aware that these guys:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:28:11 +0200
Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24 2007, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:39:16 -0400
> > Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > > request_queue and device struct must have the same valu
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:39:16 -0400
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
request_queue and device struct must have the same value of a segment
size limit. This patch adds blk_queue_segment_boundary in
__scsi_alloc_queue so LLDs don't need to call
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:40:50 -0400
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > IOMMUs merges scatter/gather segments without considering a low level
> > driver's restrictions. The problem is that IOMMUs can't access to the
> > limitations because they are in request_queue.
Douglas Gilbert wrote:
Jeff Garzik wrote:
James Bottomley wrote:
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 17:09 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
James Bottomley wrote:
This should be the final SCSI updates; it's mainly just a few accessor
completion updates and two driver merges (sym2 and qla2xxx) we also
secured Dave
James Bottomley wrote:
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 18:06 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
James Bottomley wrote:
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 17:09 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
James Bottomley wrote:
This should be the final SCSI updates; it's mainly just a few accessor
completion updates and two driver merges (sym
On Wed, Oct 24 2007, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:39:16 -0400
> Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > request_queue and device struct must have the same value of a segment
> > > size limit. This patch adds blk_queue_segment_boundary in
> > > _
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 09:28:10AM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> OK, so it's no secret that I'm the last of the subsystem maintainers
> whose day job isn't working on the linux kernel. If you want a full
> time person, who did you have in mind?
I'm willing to take on the role of scsi git-monkey
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:39:16 -0400
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > request_queue and device struct must have the same value of a segment
> > size limit. This patch adds blk_queue_segment_boundary in
> > __scsi_alloc_queue so LLDs don't need to call both
> > blk_
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 17:08 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Alan Cox wrote:
> >>> 2) Once we identified, over time, the set of drives affected by this
> >>> 3112 quirk (aka drives that didn't fully comply to SATA spec), the
> >>> debugging of corruption cases largely shifted to the
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:34:07 -0400
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > index 463a5a9..54edea2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > @@ -985,8 +985,11 @@ void pci_device_add(struct pci_dev *dev, struct
> > pci_bus *bus)
> >
> >
Matthew Jacob wrote:
> Hey- this is great stuff. This means I can finally give up on my stuff
> for linux now that there's some better and more integral stuff in
> place. Woo Hoo!
Thanks for the comment. Hopefully, you haven't gone too far with this.
I will post the progress, soon.
Thank you,
Seok
Jeff Garzik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> is this needed, given that the default is already 65536?
Apparently so, as we had to add it in the past, mainly because the
feature to limit was not part of the SCSI layer when the original limit
code was added. At that time it replaced a complicated
ACK
Based on the presence of the call. 2.6.22, for instance, does not have
this capability...
I did not test this change, just accepting on the principals. How much
testing of the change did you do Fujita?
Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn
> -Original Message-
> From: FUJITA Tomonori [mailto:[E
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 15:36 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 18:06:51 -0400
>
> > James Bottomley wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 17:09 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > >> James Bottomley wrote:
> > >>> This should be the final SCSI update
On Wed, Oct 24 2007, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> IOMMUs merges scatter/gather segments without considering a low level
> driver's restrictions. The problem is that IOMMUs can't access to the
> limitations because they are in request_queue.
>
> This patchset introduces a new structure, device_dma_para
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 18:06 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 17:09 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >> James Bottomley wrote:
> >>> This should be the final SCSI updates; it's mainly just a few accessor
> >>> completion updates and two driver merges (sym2 and
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 05:25:43 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 11:59:20AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > In 2.6.24-rc1 I see the following warning:
> > drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_glue.c: In function "sym_eh_handler":
> > drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_glue.c:612: warning: "io_r
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
IOMMUs merges scatter/gather segments without considering a low level
driver's restrictions. The problem is that IOMMUs can't access to the
limitations because they are in request_queue.
This patchset introduces a new structure, device_dma_parameters,
including dma informa
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
This sets the segment size limit properly via pci_set_dma_max_seg_size
and remove blk_queue_max_segment_size because scsi-ml calls it.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/ata/sata_inic162x.c | 25 +
1 files changed, 13
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
request_queue and device struct must have the same value of a segment
size limit. This patch adds blk_queue_segment_boundary in
__scsi_alloc_queue so LLDs don't need to call both
blk_queue_segment_boundary and set_dma_max_seg_size. A LLD can change
the default value (64KB)
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:31:30 -0400
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > This sets the segment size limit properly via pci_set_dma_max_seg_size
> > and remove blk_queue_max_segment_size because scsi-ml calls it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTE
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
This patch makes iommu respect segment size limits when merging sg
lists.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/parisc/ccio-dma.c |2 +-
drivers/parisc/iommu-helpers.h |7 ++-
drivers/parisc/sba_iommu.c |2 +-
3 files chan
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
index 463a5a9..54edea2 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
@@ -985,8 +985,11 @@ void pci_device_add(struct pci_dev *dev, struct pci_bus
*bus)
set_dev_node(&dev->dev, pcibus_to_node(bus));
dev->dev.dma_mask = &dev->dma_mask;
+ dev->
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
iommu code merges scatter/gather segments without considering a low
level driver's restrictions. The problem is that iommu code can't
access to the limitations because they are in request_queue.
This patch adds a new structure, device_dma_parameters, including dma
informat
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
This sets the segment size limit properly via pci_set_dma_max_seg_size
and remove blk_queue_max_segment_size because scsi-ml calls it.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/scsi/aacraid/linit.c |9 ++---
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 11:59:20AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> In 2.6.24-rc1 I see the following warning:
> drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_glue.c: In function "sym_eh_handler":
> drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_glue.c:612: warning: "io_reset" may be used
> uninitialized in this function
>
> Although
This adds struct device_dma_parameters in struct pci_dev and properly
sets up a pointer in struct device.
The default max_segment_size is set to 64K, same to the block layer's
default value.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/pci/pci.c |8
drivers/pci/p
iommu code merges scatter/gather segments without considering a low
level driver's restrictions. The problem is that iommu code can't
access to the limitations because they are in request_queue.
This patch adds a new structure, device_dma_parameters, including dma
information. A pointer to device_
This patch makes iommu respect segment size limits when merging sg
lists.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c |2 +-
arch/powerpc/kernel/iommu.c |8 ++--
include/asm-powerpc/iommu.h |2 +-
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deleti
This patch makes pci-gart iommu respect segment size limits when
merging sg lists.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/x86/kernel/pci-gart_64.c |7 +++
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-gart_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pc
This sets the segment size limit properly via pci_set_dma_max_seg_size
and remove blk_queue_max_segment_size because scsi-ml calls it.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/scsi/aacraid/linit.c |9 ++---
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git
This patch makes pci_iommu respect segment size limits when merging sg
lists.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c | 24 ++--
include/asm-alpha/pci.h |1 +
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git
IOMMUs merges scatter/gather segments without considering a low level
driver's restrictions. The problem is that IOMMUs can't access to the
limitations because they are in request_queue.
This patchset introduces a new structure, device_dma_parameters,
including dma information. A pointer to device
This patch makes iommu respect segment size limits when merging sg
lists.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/parisc/ccio-dma.c |2 +-
drivers/parisc/iommu-helpers.h |7 ++-
drivers/parisc/sba_iommu.c |2 +-
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3
This sets the segment size limit properly via pci_set_dma_max_seg_size
and remove blk_queue_max_segment_size because scsi-ml calls it.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/ata/sata_inic162x.c | 25 +
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletio
This patch makes iommu respect segment size limits when merging sg
lists.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/sparc64/kernel/iommu.c|2 +-
arch/sparc64/kernel/iommu_common.c |8 ++--
arch/sparc64/kernel/iommu_common.h |3 ++-
arch/sparc64/kernel/pci
request_queue and device struct must have the same value of a segment
size limit. This patch adds blk_queue_segment_boundary in
__scsi_alloc_queue so LLDs don't need to call both
blk_queue_segment_boundary and set_dma_max_seg_size. A LLD can change
the default value (64KB) can call device_dma_param
This patch makes sba iommu respect segment size limits when merging sg
lists.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/ia64/hp/common/sba_iommu.c |8 ++--
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/ia64/hp/common/sba_iommu.c b/arch/ia64/hp/comm
drivers/scsi/hptiop.c: In function 'hptiop_host_request_callback':
drivers/scsi/hptiop.c:378: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks
a cast
drivers/scsi/hptiop.c:378: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks
a cast
Use min_t(size_t, ...) to fix.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Garz
In 2.6.24-rc1 I see the following warning:
drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_glue.c: In function "sym_eh_handler":
drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_glue.c:612: warning: "io_reset" may be used
uninitialized in this function
Although gcc is wrong and the code is actually correct, it can easily
be made more
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> James Bottomley wrote:
>> On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 17:09 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> James Bottomley wrote:
This should be the final SCSI updates; it's mainly just a few accessor
completion updates and two driver merges (sym2 and qla2xxx) we also
secured DaveM's a
On Tue, Oct 23 2007, Mike Miller wrote:
> PATCH 1 of 1
>
> This patch updates the copyright information for the cciss driver. It
> includes extending the year to 2007 (how timely) and some minor corrections
> deemed necessary by HP legal and the Open Source Review Board. Please
> consider this pat
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 18:17:49 +0800 "Peter Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Morton
>
> Thanks for your doing.
> We modified source code as your requested. If you have any comment please
> let me know.
> Do you need RAID HBA to test at this stage? If "yes", Which address can i
> ship RAID HB
73 matches
Mail list logo
