On Wed, Jan 24 2007, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> From: Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] add bsg queue resize
> Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:23:49 +0100
>
> > On Tue, Jan 23 2007, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 20 2007, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > > This enables bsg to resize t
Douglas Gilbert wrote:
Aboo Valappil wrote:
Hi Stefan Richter,
Thanks everyone for their advice on this. As per your advice, I did the
following when the last user space target serving the scsi_host quits,
the queue command will do the following on the new commands coming through.
Stefan Richter wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
Aboo Valappil wrote:
The new version is available http://vscsihba.aboo.org/vscsihbav204.gz
404: NOT FOUND
.gz -> .tgz
Besides the tarball, a browsable source tree would be nice for people
who just want to take a quick look.
T
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 05:49 +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > + if ((scsicmd->cmnd[0] == INQUIRY) && (expose_physicals <= 0)) {
> > + u8 b;
> > + u8 b1;
> > + /* We can't expose disk devices because we can't
> > +
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 08:31 -0800, Mark Haverkamp wrote:
> The other patches still apply with this one removed (One applies with
> fuzz). Is that OK or should I re-diff and resend them.
That should be fine ... I get large numbers of patches that either apply
with fuzz or even have rejects.
James
Fix a typo in NCR_D700
Signed-off-by Mark Haverkamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
--- scsi-misc-2.6.orig/drivers/scsi/NCR_D700.c 2007-01-15 09:18:58.0
-0800
+++ scsi-misc-2.6/drivers/scsi/NCR_D700.c 2007-01-24 09:27:02.0
-0800
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@
hostdata->base = ioport
From: Greg Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The interprocessor messaging unit supports mailbox style communication
between the two Xscale cores on iop342.
Signed-off-by: Greg Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/arm/mach-iop13xx/Kconfig
The imu (inter-processor messaging unit) on the iop13xx enables mailbox
style communication between the two cores on iop13xx. Greg Tucker has
has wrapped this capability in a scsi driver which allows Linux to
interface with the other core as if it were a scsi disk target. I would
like to submit i
From: Greg Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Enable Linux to access the other core as if it were a scsi target.
Signed-off-by: Greg Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/arm/mach-iop13xx/imu/Kconfig |7
drivers/scsi/Makefile |1
drive
On Mon, 8 Jan 2007, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 11:19 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > Back in December you wrote a patch to expose the queue ioctls, and sent it
> > (off-list) to Jens Axboe and to me. Jens spproved it, but then it
> > disappeared and was never applied. Unfortunat
How 'bout a comment in scsh_host.h indicating that the pointer will be NULL
unless
initialized by the driver?
"Protect shared block queue tag" is unique to stex. Perhaps have no comment on
the variable declaration in scsi_host.h and explain why you use it in stex.
Mike
Ed Lin wrote:
> The blo
On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 16:53 -0800, Ed Lin wrote:
> The block layer uses lock to protect request queue. Every scsi device
> has a unique request queue, and queue lock is the default lock in struct
> request_queue. This is good for normal cases. But for a host with
> shared queue tag (e.g. stex cont
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Reed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 7:59 AM
> To: Ed Lin
> Cc: linux-scsi; linux-kernel; james.Bottomley; jeff; Promise_Linux
> Subject: Re: [patch] scsi: use lock per host instead of per
> device for shared queue tag h
> It seems another driver(qla4xxx) is also using shared queue tag.
> It is natural to imagine there might be same symptom in that
> driver. But I don't know the driver and have no hardware so I
> can not say anything certain about it.
qla4xxx implements slightly differently, in the sense we don't
> -Original Message-
> From: David Somayajulu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:03 PM
> To: Ed Lin; Michael Reed
> Cc: linux-scsi; linux-kernel; james.Bottomley; jeff;
> Promise_Linux; Jens Axboe
> Subject: RE: [patch] scsi: use lock per host instead of per
> -Original Message-
> From: James Bottomley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 9:00 AM
> To: Ed Lin
> Cc: linux-scsi; linux-kernel; jeff; Promise_Linux
> Subject: Re: [patch] scsi: use lock per host instead of per
> device forshared queue tag host
>
...
>
>
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:07:20 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7864
>
>Summary: A MTIOCTOP/MTWEOF within the early warning will cause
> the file number to be incorrect
> Kernel Version: 2.6.19.2
> Status: NE
Fine by me.
Acked-By: David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
18 matches
Mail list logo
