On Mon, 2013-04-15 at 11:20 -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> On 4/15/2013 9:13 AM, Ewan Milne wrote:
>
> >> patch could attempt to clear the check conditions from LUNs that share
> >> the I_T.
> >
> > I think the mid-layer will handle that automatically. If check conditions
> > are reported the com
On 4/15/2013 9:13 AM, Ewan Milne wrote:
>> patch could attempt to clear the check conditions from LUNs that share
>> the I_T.
>
> I think the mid-layer will handle that automatically. If check conditions
> are reported the commands will have to be reissued.
But, not automatically (unles
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 16:52 -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> What happened to this patch? The trail of suggested fixes for the
> REPORT LUNS
> DATA HAS CHANGED check condition is getting pretty long. The number of devices
> (our product included) in the field that have the ability to on the fly
On 2/1/2013 11:53 AM, Ewan D. Milne wrote:
> The mechanism used is to flag when certain UA ASC/ASCQ codes are received
> that report asynchronous changes to the storage device configuration. An
> appropriate uevent is then generated for the scsi_device or scsi_target
> object. An aggregation mec
4 matches
Mail list logo
