Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-11 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 10:27:46AM -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 05:45 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 01:19:30PM -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > > The device does send these error messages currently, but it takes some > > > time to get the

Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-11 Thread Chandra Seetharaman
On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 05:45 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 01:19:30PM -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > The device does send these error messages currently, but it takes some > > time to get the check condition back, which adds up the time to boot > > especially when the

Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-09 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 01:19:30PM -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > The device does send these error messages currently, but it takes some > time to get the check condition back, which adds up the time to boot > especially when the # of LUNS is huge. > > For example, in my test configuration, I

Re: no INQUIRY from userspace please (was Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE)

2008-02-07 Thread Luben Tuikov
--- On Thu, 2/7/08, James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is all a tradeoff. If you want userspace *never* to > issue raw SCSI > commands like INQUIRY, we're going to have to provide > the needed > information from the kernel via sysfs ... including VPD > strings. This > is something

Re: no INQUIRY from userspace please (was Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE)

2008-02-07 Thread James Bottomley
On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 11:08 +0100, Stefan Richter wrote: > Mike Anderson wrote: > > A number of user apps like lvm scanning that execute media access commands > > already have filter capability to filter devices that one does not want to > > scan. Another class of device scanners just use inquiries

no INQUIRY from userspace please (was Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE)

2008-02-07 Thread Stefan Richter
Mike Anderson wrote: > A number of user apps like lvm scanning that execute media access commands > already have filter capability to filter devices that one does not want to > scan. Another class of device scanners just use inquiries which are not > effected by the passive state (though some could

Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-05 Thread Chandra Seetharaman
On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 13:56 -0800, Mike Anderson wrote: > Mike Christie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > When IO is sent to a path that cannot execute IO optimally, the scsi hw > > handler hook for sense processing (see rdac_check_sense in "[PATCH 8/9] > > scsi_dh: add lsi rdac device handler" and

Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-05 Thread Mike Anderson
Mike Christie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When IO is sent to a path that cannot execute IO optimally, the scsi hw > handler hook for sense processing (see rdac_check_sense in "[PATCH 8/9] > scsi_dh: add lsi rdac device handler" and the scsi_error.c hook in in > "scsi_dh: add skeleton for SCSI D

Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-05 Thread Mike Christie
James Bottomley wrote: On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 12:15 -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 12:58 -0600, James Bottomley wrote: On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 16:32 -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: Subject: scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE From: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECT

Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-04 Thread Chandra Seetharaman
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 14:28 -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 12:15 -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 12:58 -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 16:32 -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > > > Subject: scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_

Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-04 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 12:15 -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 12:58 -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 16:32 -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > > Subject: scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE > > > > > > From: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-04 Thread Mike Anderson
James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 16:32 -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > Subject: scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE > > > > From: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > This patch adds a new device state SDEV_PASSIVE, to correspond to the > >

Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-04 Thread Chandra Seetharaman
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 12:58 -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 16:32 -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > Subject: scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE > > > > From: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > This patch adds a new device state SDEV_PASSIVE, to correspond

Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-02-04 Thread James Bottomley
On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 16:32 -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > Subject: scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE > > From: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > This patch adds a new device state SDEV_PASSIVE, to correspond to the > passive side access of an active/passive multipathed device

[PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE

2008-01-23 Thread Chandra Seetharaman
Subject: scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE From: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This patch adds a new device state SDEV_PASSIVE, to correspond to the passive side access of an active/passive multipathed device. Signed-off-by: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- --- drivers