Hi Martin & Co,
So after playing with the mainline DIF client against an initial WIP
target DIF support patch, I've started hitting a bug in
bio_integrity_verify() that causes READ verify logic to be silently
skipped for both WIP target and existing scsi_debug DIF code.
The issue is with the scsi
On 12/23/2013 02:51 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-12-22 at 17:17 +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
>> On 12/22/2013 10:56 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
>>> Hi Chen,
>>>
>>> On Sat, 2013-12-21 at 10:08 +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
In kernel, need use div64_u64_rem() instead of operator '%
On Mon, 2013-12-23 at 09:13 -0600, Steve Magnani wrote:
> Nicholas,
>
> On Sat, 2013-12-14 at 10:51 -0600, Dr. Greg Wettstein wrote:
> > On Dec 12, 11:45am, "Nicholas A. Bellinger" wrote:
> > > We don't add interfaces into mainline drive code to support
> > > out-of-tree projects, because quite
Hi Folks,
Just a heads up that scsi-mq alpha code has been updated to v3.13-rc3
using the freshly upstreamed blk-mq logic. The working branch is
available here:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nab/target-pending.git scsi-mq
The changelog since the last v3.12-rc3 rev includes:
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> However, the code above already has the users. Do you think it makes
> sense to add something like
No. I think it makes sense to put a big warning on any users you find,
and fart in the general direction of any developer who did that brok
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8221
Alan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
On 12/23, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > Initially I thought that this is obviously wrong, irqsave/irqrestore
> > assume that "flags" is owned by the caller, not by the lock. And
> > iirc this was certainly wrong in the past.
> >
> > But when I look at spinlock.c it seems that
* Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 12/23, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps we should ask the maintainers upstream? Even if this works, I am
> > not sure this is _supposed_ to work. I mean, in theory spin_lock_irqave()
> > can be changed as, say
> >
> > #define spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags)
On 12/23, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > In short, is this code
> >
> > spinlock_t LOCK;
> > unsigned long FLAGS;
> >
> > void my_lock(void)
> > {
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&LOCK, FLAGS);
> >
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> In short, is this code
>
> spinlock_t LOCK;
> unsigned long FLAGS;
>
> void my_lock(void)
> {
> spin_lock_irqsave(&LOCK, FLAGS);
> }
>
> void my_unlock(void)
> {
>
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 8:13 AM, wrote:
> This patch has fix for LSI Gen-1 MR controller issue which only pop-up on
> few systems and it is not generic.
>
> On few system, MR 1078 MR controller is not working if mmio decoding is off.
> This patch proposed early quirck entry for Device id 0x1000/0
On 12/23, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Perhaps we should ask the maintainers upstream? Even if this works, I am
> not sure this is _supposed_ to work. I mean, in theory spin_lock_irqave()
> can be changed as, say
>
> #define spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags) \
> do {
On 12/23, Jason Seba wrote:
>
> Wouldn't the contents of the global flags value be protected by the
> spinlock itself?
This can be even true because nowadays spin_lock_irqsave() writes to
"flags" after it takes the lock, and _irqrestore works gets the copy
of "flags" before it releases the lock.
On 12/23, Tomas Henzl wrote:
>
> On 12/23/2013 04:06 PM, Jack Wang wrote:
> > On 12/23/2013 03:55 PM, Jason Seba wrote:
> >> Why is this considered dangerous? I put some thought into it and
> >> couldn't find any obvious reason why it wouldn't work, but I also
> >> couldn't find any other drivers
On 12/23/2013 04:33 PM, Jason Seba wrote:
> Wouldn't the contents of the global flags value be protected by the
> spinlock itself? Or is that making a dangerous assumption about the
> particulars of how spinlocks work on various platforms?
I'm not an expert but I think, that the spinlock starts
Wouldn't the contents of the global flags value be protected by the
spinlock itself? Or is that making a dangerous assumption about the
particulars of how spinlocks work on various platforms?
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Tomas Henzl wrote:
> On 12/23/2013 04:06 PM, Jack Wang wrote:
>> On 1
On 12/23/2013 04:06 PM, Jack Wang wrote:
> On 12/23/2013 03:55 PM, Jason Seba wrote:
>> Why is this considered dangerous? I put some thought into it and
>> couldn't find any obvious reason why it wouldn't work, but I also
>> couldn't find any other drivers that work this way. Is there a
>> partic
This patch has fix for LSI Gen-1 MR controller issue which only pop-up on
few systems and it is not generic.
On few system, MR 1078 MR controller is not working if mmio decoding is off.
This patch proposed early quirck entry for Device id 0x1000/0x0411 to enable
mmio.
Signed-off-by: Kashyap Desa
Nicholas,
On Sat, 2013-12-14 at 10:51 -0600, Dr. Greg Wettstein wrote:
> On Dec 12, 11:45am, "Nicholas A. Bellinger" wrote:
> > > What I would prefer myself is to have a single set of target drivers
> > > that works for both LIO and SCST. That would not only make both projects
> > > easier to main
On 12/23/2013 03:55 PM, Jason Seba wrote:
> Why is this considered dangerous? I put some thought into it and
> couldn't find any obvious reason why it wouldn't work, but I also
> couldn't find any other drivers that work this way. Is there a
> particular reason to avoid doing it this way?
>
If y
Why is this considered dangerous? I put some thought into it and
couldn't find any obvious reason why it wouldn't work, but I also
couldn't find any other drivers that work this way. Is there a
particular reason to avoid doing it this way?
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Suresh Thiagarajan
wro
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42765
Alan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |OBSOLETE
Status|NEW
> "Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig writes:
Christoph> We have the block integrity code to support DIF/DIX in the
Christoph> the tree for about 5 and a half years, and we still don't
Christoph> have a single consumer of it.
What do you mean? If you have a DIX-capable HBA (lpfc, qla2xxx, zfc
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 08:35:22AM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> > "Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig writes:
>
> Christoph> We have the block integrity code to support DIF/DIX in the
> Christoph> the tree for about 5 and a half years, and we still don't
> Christoph> have a single consumer
-Original Message-
From: Jack Wang [mailto:xjtu...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 23, 2013 7:03 PM
To: Tomas Henzl; Viswas G
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; jason.seb...@gmail.com;
jbottom...@parallels.com; Vasanthalakshmi Tharmarajan; Suresh Thiagarajan
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pm80xx:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36742
Alan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
On 12/23/2013 02:07 PM, Tomas Henzl wrote:
> On 12/18/2013 12:28 PM, Viswas G wrote:
>> From 9338d4bc92b23b4c283f9bd6812646ab74866a40 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Suresh Thiagarajan
>> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 21:15:20 +0530
>> Subject: [PATCH] pm80xx: Spinlock fix
>>
>> spin_unlock was used in
On 12/18/2013 12:28 PM, Viswas G wrote:
> From 9338d4bc92b23b4c283f9bd6812646ab74866a40 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Suresh Thiagarajan
> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 21:15:20 +0530
> Subject: [PATCH] pm80xx: Spinlock fix
>
> spin_unlock was used instead of spin_unlock_irqrestore. To fix this
> loc
This patch fixes kernel panic issue while booting into the kdump kernel.
We have triggered crash and kdump vmcore was successful. No issues seen while
booting into the OS.
Signed-off-by: Mahesh Rajashekhara
---
drivers/scsi/aacraid/aacraid.h |2 +-
drivers/scsi/aacraid/rx.c |5 +++
From: Vijaya Mohan Guvva
Fixed following smatch warnings in bfa.
drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_ioc.c:3882 bfa_sfp_show_comp() error: memcpy()
'des' too small (64 vs 248)
drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_ioc.c:6859 bfa_flash_status_read() warn: unsigned
'status' is never less than zero.
drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_ioc.c:6881
> -Original Message-
> From: Wei Yongjun [mailto:weiyj...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2013 8:21 AM
> To: Anil Gurumurthy; Vijaya Mohan Guvva; jbottom...@parallels.com
> Cc: yongjun_...@trendmicro.com.cn; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: [PATCH] [SCSI] bfa: fix missing unloc
31 matches
Mail list logo
