On Fri, 2013-11-15 at 23:53 +, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
wrote:
> Beware that just because the LUN inventory is the same doesn't mean
> the logical units are the same. A logical unit at LUN X might have been
> deleted and another logical unit created and assigned to LUN X, but
> now co
On Mon, 2013-11-18 at 00:52 -0700, Ramesh Chikkanayakanahally wrote:
> Thanks for the response.
>
> If using RSCN sounds like a reasonable approach in this scenario
> (protocol limitations), then as per the original question - would it
> be acceptable to add an interface in scsi_transport_fc la
(REPORT LUNS) ?
Thanks,
Ramesh C N
-Original Message-
From: Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) [mailto:elli...@hp.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2013 5:23 AM
To: Ramesh Chikkanayakanahally; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Cc: jbottom...@parallels.com
Subject: RE: Question on SCSI target scan
3 8:10 AM
> To: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: jbottom...@parallels.com
> Subject: Question on SCSI target scan
>
> Hi,
>
> This question is related to scsi_transport_fc layer.
>
> Background:
> When new LUNs are added to a target, the target can send check
Hi,
This question is related to scsi_transport_fc layer.
Background:
When new LUNs are added to a target, the target can send check condition
with SK/ASC/ASCQ indicating that the reported LUNS data has changed. Then the
initiator can send the report LUNs command to discover the changes. But
5 matches
Mail list logo
