On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 15:57 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
> @@ -1644,10 +1644,14 @@ static void srp_process_rsp(struct srp_target_port
> *target, struct srp_rsp *rsp)
>SCSI_S
e consistent with that of the FC
> transport layer.
> * Fix a rare race condition triggered by path failover.
> * Document the rport state transitions.
For all three,
Acked-by: David Dillow
Thanks Bart!
--
Dave Dillow
National Center for Computational Science
Oak Ridge National Labo
On Sat, 2013-10-26 at 14:29 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> The changes since the previous version of this patch series are as follows
> (see also http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.rdma/17693):
> - Renamed the "can_queue" parameter into "queue_size".
> - Corrected the title of the introdu
On Sat, 2013-10-19 at 18:13 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Since it takes some work to figure out the state transitions from the
> source code, I have tried to draw a diagram representing all state
> transitions. I have attached that diagram to this e-mail. That diagram
> probably will make it
queue size configurable.
> - Make it possible to figure out which SCSI host corresponds to which
>SRP initiator port by making the SGID (source GID) available in sysfs.
Many of these already have it, but for patches 1-10:
Acked-by: David Dillow
--
Dave Dillow
National Center for Computatio
amp;
>dev_loss_tmo < 0) is now rejected as requested by Dave Dillow.
> - Fixed a race between transport layer failure handling and device
>removal. This issue was reported by Vu Pham.
For patches 1-6,
Acked-by: David Dillow
--
Dave Dillow
National Center for Computational Scienc
On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 10:01 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 07/03/13 20:57, David Dillow wrote:
> > And I'm getting the strong sense that the answer to my question about
> > fast_io_fail_tmo >= 0 when dev_loss_tmo is that we should not allow that
> > combination,
On Wed, 2013-07-03 at 20:24 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 07/03/13 19:27, David Dillow wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-07-03 at 18:00 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >> The combination of dev_loss_tmo off and reconnect_delay > 0 worked fine
> >> in my tests. An I/O fail
On Wed, 2013-07-03 at 18:00 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 07/03/13 17:14, David Dillow wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-07-03 at 14:54 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >> +int srp_tmo_valid(int fast_io_fail_tmo, int dev_loss_tmo)
> >> +{
> >> + return (fast
On Wed, 2013-07-03 at 14:54 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> +int srp_tmo_valid(int fast_io_fail_tmo, int dev_loss_tmo)
> +{
> + return (fast_io_fail_tmo < 0 || dev_loss_tmo < 0 ||
> + fast_io_fail_tmo < dev_loss_tmo) &&
> + fast_io_fail_tmo <= SCSI_DEVICE_BLOCK_MAX_TIMEO
On Mon, 2013-07-01 at 09:01 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 06/30/13 23:05, David Dillow wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-06-28 at 14:53 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >> +int srp_tmo_valid(int fast_io_fail_tmo, int dev_loss_tmo)
> >> +{
> >> + return (fast
On Fri, 2013-06-28 at 14:56 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> From: Sebastian Riemer
>
> Avoid that path failover in a multipath setup causes the SCSI layer
> to generate kernel messages about SCSI command failures. This patch
> speeds up SRP initiator operation significantly when monitoring
> kern
sary, that is possible by deleting
> and recreating an rport via sysfs.
Acked-by: David Dillow
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
gt; before removing a remote port.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
> Cc: Roland Dreier
> Cc: James Bottomley
> Cc: David Dillow
> Cc: Vu Pham
> Cc: Sebastian Riemer
> ---
> Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-transport-srp | 37
es that require this are eventually accepted,
Acked-by: David Dillow
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 12:21 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 8:04 PM, David Dillow wrote:
> > We can push it through James's tree if need be, but Bart's code is
> > pretty self-contained, and going through the SCSI tree will introduce
> > m
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 09:57 +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:44 AM, David Dillow wrote:
> > One may also pull this series from github:
> > git pull git://github.com/dillow/srp-initiator.git ha-merge-v1
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> The kernel mai
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 23:15 +0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 10:50 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > - I think the srp_transport stuff should go through linux-scsi /
> > James B.
> >instead of my tree, esp. since it's shared with the IBM vscsi stuff
> > (I think)
> > - I se
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 10:46 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 11/26/12 05:44, David Dillow wrote:
> > The state of the target has several conditions that overlap, making it
> > easier to model as a bit-field of exceptional conditions rather than an
> > enum of all possible
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 10:17 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 11/26/12 05:44, David Dillow wrote:
> > Once we know we have an issue with the QP, there is no point trying to
> > send anything else down the pipe. This also allows us to consolidate
> > code in the SCSI EH path.
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 10:43 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 11/26/12 05:44, David Dillow wrote:
> > From: Bart Van Assche
> >
> > Some SCSI upper layer drivers, e.g. sd, issue SCSI commands from
> > inside scsi_remove_host() (see also the sd_shutdown() call in
>
On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 23:44 -0500, David Dillow wrote:
> From: David Dillow
> From: Bart Van Assche
>
> Eliminate the private_rport_attrs[] array and the SETUP_*() macros
> used to set up that array since the information in that array
> duplicates the information in
From: Bart Van Assche
Cc: FUJITA Tomonori
Cc: Robert Jennings
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
Signed-off-by: David Dillow
---
Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-transport-srp | 12
1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs
state space.
Needs-to-be-signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
Signed-off-by: David Dillow
---
drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c | 146 +--
drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.h | 11 +--
2 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers
From: Bart Van Assche
Document the sysfs attributes of the SRP initiator according
to the rules specified in Documentation/ABI/README.
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
Signed-off-by: David Dillow
---
Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-driver-ib_srp | 156 ++
1 files
reading the attribute array will see all
values written into that array.
Cc: FUJITA Tomonori
Cc: Robert Jennings
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
Signed-off-by: David Dillow
---
drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c |3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers
From: Bart Van Assche
Enlarge the block layer timeout for disks such that it is above
the InfiniBand transport layer timeout.
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
Signed-off-by: David Dillow
---
drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c | 45 +++
drivers/infiniband/ulp
gs
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
Signed-off-by: David Dillow
---
Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-transport-srp |7 +++
drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c | 10 ++
drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_srp.c| 22 +-
include/scsi/scsi_trans
From: David Dillow
Eliminate the private_rport_attrs[] array and the SETUP_*() macros
used to set up that array since the information in that array
duplicates the information in the static device attributes. Also,
verify whether SRP_RPORT_ATTRS is large enough since it is easy
to forget to
rp_transport: Fix attribute registration
srp_transport: Simplify attribute initialization code
srp_transport: Document sysfs attributes
IB/srp: Allow SRP disconnect through sysfs
David Dillow (2):
IB/srp: simplify state tracking
IB/srp: don't send anything on a bad QP
Ishai Rabinovitz (
Once we know we have an issue with the QP, there is no point trying to
send anything else down the pipe. This also allows us to consolidate
code in the SCSI EH path.
Needs-to-be-signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
[ adapted to new state tracking code ]
Signed-off-by: David Dillow
---
drivers
.
Signed-off-by: Ishai Rabinovitz
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
[ updated to current code from OFED, cleaned up commit message ]
Signed-off-by: David Dillow
---
drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c | 66 ++
1 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
diff
From: Vu Pham
From: Vu Pham
Now that SRP recreates the CM id, QP, and CQ for each connection,
there is no need to wait for the timewait state to complete.
Signed-off-by: Vu Pham
Signed-off-by: David Dillow
---
drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c |3 ---
1 files changed, 0 insertions
tracking ]
Signed-off-by: David Dillow
---
drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c | 11 ++-
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
index 2951e1c..f7d7e6a 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp
On Fri, 2012-11-23 at 16:07 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 09/27/12 02:31, David Dillow wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 17:05 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >> On 08/09/12 17:41, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >>> [ ... ]
> >>
> >> Hello Dave,
&g
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 17:05 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 08/09/12 17:41, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > [ ... ]
>
> Hello Dave,
>
> More than six weeks have elapsed since I posted version four of this
> patch series. It would be appreciated if you could tell me when review
> comments for this
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 10:50 +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 07/16/12 22:28, David Dillow wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 18:07 -0400, Mike Christie wrote:
> >> Not sure about the ping code, but I think the dev loss tmo and fast io
> >> fail related stuff should go
On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 18:38 -0400, Mike Christie wrote:
> On 07/16/2012 04:28 PM, David Dillow wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 18:07 -0400, Mike Christie wrote:
> >> For the ping code, does it use TUR because there is not a transport way
> >> to test the path/
On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 18:07 -0400, Mike Christie wrote:
> On 01/14/2012 05:56 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > Add the necessary functions in the SRP transport module to allow
> > an SRP initiator driver to implement transport layer recovery.
>
> I was updating my iscsi dev loss patch when I saw this
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 14:53 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Another issue I have to look further into is that dd and xdd report
> different results for very large block sizes (> 1 MB).
Be aware that xdd reports 1 MB as 100, not 1048576. Though, it looks
like dd is the same, so that's probably
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 18:08 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> If anyone has a suggestion for a better test than dd to compare the
> performance of SCSI storage protocols, please let it know.
xdd on /dev/sda, sdb, etc. using -dio to do direct IO seems to work
decently, though it is hard (ie, impossi
41 matches
Mail list logo
