RE: [PATCH 1/6] megaraid_sas: Do not wait forever

2014-01-23 Thread Desai, Kashyap
Hannes: We have already worked on "wait_event" usage in "megasas_issue_blocked_cmd". That code will be posted by LSI once we received test result from LSI Q/A team. If you see the current OCR code in Linux Driver we do "re-send the IOCTL command". MR product does not want IOCTL timeout due to

Re: [LSF/MM ATTEND] interest in blk-mq, scsi-mq, dm-cache, dm-thinp, dm-*

2014-01-23 Thread Hannes Reinecke
On 01/24/2014 03:37 AM, Mike Christie wrote: > On 01/13/2014 05:36 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> On 01/10/2014 07:27 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: >>> I would like to attend to participate in discussions related to topics >>> listed in the subject. As a maintainer of DM I'd be interested to >>> learn/di

Re: [LSF/MM ATTEND] interest in blk-mq, scsi-mq, dm-cache, dm-thinp, dm-*

2014-01-23 Thread Mike Christie
On 01/13/2014 05:36 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > On 01/10/2014 07:27 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: >> I would like to attend to participate in discussions related to topics >> listed in the subject. As a maintainer of DM I'd be interested to >> learn/discuss areas that should become a development focus

[PATCH 4/5] ia64 simscsi: fix race condition and simplify the code

2014-01-23 Thread Mikulas Patocka
The simscsi driver processes the requests in the request routine and then offloads the completion callback to a tasklet. This is buggy because there is parallel unsynchronized access to the completion queue from the request routine and from the tasklet. With current SCSI architecture, requests can

Open/INQUIRY fails on RESERVE'd tape device

2014-01-23 Thread Matthias Eble
Hi list, When a tape device is reserved with old reserve/release commands, we see inquiry only works on the scsi generic device. For scsi tape devices open() fails already: # lsscsi -g | grep st15 [2:0:6:0]tapeHP Ultrium 5-SCSI I5DZ /dev/st15 /dev/sg17 # sg_vpd -vvv /dev/st15

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Chris Mason
On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 13:27 -0800, Joel Becker wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:47:01AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 18:37 +, Chris Mason wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 10:13 -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 18:02 +, Chris Mason w

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Joel Becker
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:47:01AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 18:37 +, Chris Mason wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 10:13 -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 18:02 +, Chris Mason wrote: > [agreement cut because it's boring for the reader] > >

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Joel Becker
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 07:55:50AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 07:35:58PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > > > I expect it would be relatively simple to get large blocksizes working > > > on powerpc with 64k PAGE_SIZE. So before diving in and doing huge > > > amounts o

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014, James Bottomley wrote: > If the compound page infrastructure exists today and is usable for this, > what else do we need to do? ... because if it's a couple of trivial > changes and a few minor patches to filesystems to take advantage of it, > we might as well do it anyway. I

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014, Mel Gorman wrote: > Large block support was proposed years ago by Christoph Lameter > (http://lwn.net/Articles/232757/). I think I was just getting started > in the community at the time so I do not recall any of the details. I do > believe it motivated an alternative by Nick

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014, Mel Gorman wrote: > Don't get me wrong, I'm interested in the topic but I severely doubt I'd > have the capacity to research the background of this in advance. It's also > unlikely that I'd work on it in the future without throwing out my current > TODO list. In an ideal world

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Dave Chinner
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 04:44:38PM +, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 07:47:53AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:27 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:13:59AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 18:02 +,

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread James Bottomley
On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:44 +, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 07:47:53AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:27 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:13:59AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 18:02 +, Chris

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Dave Chinner
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 07:55:50AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 07:35:58PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > > > I expect it would be relatively simple to get large blocksizes working > > > on powerpc with 64k PAGE_SIZE. So before diving in and doing huge > > > amounts o

Re: Persistent reservation behaviour/compliance with redundant controllers

2014-01-23 Thread Lee Duncan
On 01/07/2014 12:18 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 11:53:44PM +0100, Matthias Eble wrote: >> >>> I have a "persistent reservations for dummies" document I wrote that I >>> can send you off list, if you like. >> >> I think I know how PRs work. Yet I'd be happy about your docume

[PATCH] sym53c8xx_2: Set DID_REQUEUE return code when aborting squeue.

2014-01-23 Thread Mikulas Patocka
When the controller encounters an error (including QUEUE FULL or BUSY status), it aborts all not yet submitted requests in the function sym_dequeue_from_squeue. This function aborts them with DID_SOFT_ERROR. If the disk has a full tag queue, the request that caused the overflow is aborted with

Re: [usb-storage] Re: usb disk recognized but fails

2014-01-23 Thread Alan Stern
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014, Milan Svoboda wrote: > Whoaa!! > > I recompiled the master again, but now with a little bit modified > configuration, mainly I disabled the CONFIG_USB_STORAGE_CYPRESS_ATACB and > it works like a charm! Disk is properly and immediately detected and works! I don't see how tha

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Mel Gorman
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 07:47:53AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:27 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:13:59AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 18:02 +, Chris Mason wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 09:21 -0800, James

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread James Bottomley
On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:27 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:13:59AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 18:02 +, Chris Mason wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 09:21 -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 17:02 +, Chris Mason

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Theodore Ts'o
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 07:35:58PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > I expect it would be relatively simple to get large blocksizes working > > on powerpc with 64k PAGE_SIZE. So before diving in and doing huge > > amounts of work, perhaps someone can do a proof-of-concept on powerpc > > (or ia64

Re: [usb-storage] Re: usb disk recognized but fails

2014-01-23 Thread Milan Svoboda
Whoaa!! I recompiled the master again, but now with a little bit modified configuration, mainly I disabled the CONFIG_USB_STORAGE_CYPRESS_ATACB and it works like a charm! Disk is properly and immediately detected and works! I also tried to boot to standard kernel and disable loading ums_cypress

[PATCH] isci: update version to 1.2

2014-01-23 Thread Lukasz Dorau
The version of isci driver has not been updated for 2 years. It was 83 isci commits ago. Suspend/resume support has been implemented and many bugs have been fixed since 1.1. Now update the version to 1.2. Signed-off-by: Lukasz Dorau Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang Signed-off-by: Maciej Patelczyk ---

RE: [PATCH] isci: update version to 1.2

2014-01-23 Thread Dorau, Lukasz
On Thursday, January 23, 2014 10:39 AM Lukasz Dorau wrote: > The version of isci driver has not been updated for 2 years. > It was 83 isci commits ago. Suspend/resume support has been implemented > and many bugs have been fixed since 1.1. Now update the version to 1.2. > > Signed-off-by: Lukasz

[PATCH] isci: update version to 1.2

2014-01-23 Thread Lukasz Dorau
The version of isci driver has not been updated for 2 years. It was 83 isci commits ago. Suspend/resume support has been implemented and many bugs have been fixed since 1.1. Now update the version to 1.2. Signed-off-by: Lukasz Dorau Cc: --- drivers/scsi/isci/init.c |2 +- 1 file changed, 1

[PATCH] scsi-sd: removed unused SD_PASSTHROUGH_RETRIES

2014-01-23 Thread Sha Zhengju
From: Sha Zhengju Signed-off-by: Sha Zhengju --- drivers/scsi/sd.h |1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.h b/drivers/scsi/sd.h index 26895ff..3bbe4df 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.h +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.h @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ * Number of allowed retries */ #def

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Dave Chinner
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:50:02AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 11:30:19 -0800 James Bottomley > wrote: > > > But this, I think, is the fundamental point for debate. If we can pull > > alignment and other tricks to solve 99% of the problem is there a need > > for radical VM

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Dave Chinner
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 09:21:40AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 17:02 +, Chris Mason wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 15:19 +, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 09:58:46AM -0500, Ric Wheeler wrote: > > > > On 01/22/2014 09:34 AM, Mel Gorman wrote: > >

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Dave Chinner
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:13:59AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 18:02 +, Chris Mason wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 09:21 -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 17:02 +, Chris Mason wrote: > > > > [ I like big sectors and I cannot lie ] > > I

Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] really large storage sectors - going beyond 4096 bytes

2014-01-23 Thread Dave Chinner
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 02:34:52PM +, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 09:10:48AM -0500, Ric Wheeler wrote: > > On 01/22/2014 04:34 AM, Mel Gorman wrote: > > >On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:04:29PM -0500, Ric Wheeler wrote: > > >>One topic that has been lurking forever at the edges is th