Since the block layer already contains functionality to assign
a tag to each request, use that functionality instead of
reimplementing that functionality in the SRP initiator driver.
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche
Cc: Sagi Grimberg
Cc: Sebastian Parschauer
---
drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
> b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
> index cc0bf83b..224ef25 100644
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
> @@ -853,7 +853,6 @@ static int srp_alloc_req_data(struct srp_rdma_ch *ch)
>
On 10/17/14 12:58, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
index cc0bf83b..224ef25 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/srp/ib_srp.c
@@ -853,7 +853,6 @@ static int srp_alloc_req_data(
> -Original Message-
> From: Bart Van Assche [mailto:bvanass...@acm.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 07 October, 2014 8:07 AM
...
> @@ -1927,7 +1931,7 @@ static int srp_queuecommand(struct Scsi_Host
> *shost, struct scsi_cmnd *scmnd)
>
> cmd->opcode = SRP_CMD;
> cmd->lun= cpu_to_be64(
On 10/23/14 00:03, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Bart Van Assche [mailto:bvanass...@acm.org]
Sent: Tuesday, 07 October, 2014 8:07 AM
...
@@ -1927,7 +1931,7 @@ static int srp_queuecommand(struct Scsi_Host
*shost, struct scsi_cmnd *scmnd)
cmd->o
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:03:24PM +, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
wrote:
> Have you tested this with scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=n?
>
> Trying similar changes in hpsa, we still receive some INQUIRY commands
> submitted through queuecommand with tag -1. They are for devices for
> which slave_al
On 10/23/14 3:16 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
All my tests with use_blk_mq=n were run with a WARN_ON_ONCE(req->tag <
0) statement present in srp_queuecommand(). I haven't seen any kernel
warning being triggered during the tests I ran.
Bart, what's the data type of "req->tag", here? (E.g., if it
linux-rdma; Scales, Webb; Don
> Brace (PMC)
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/12] IB/srp: Use block layer tags
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:03:24PM +, Elliott, Robert (Server
> Storage) wrote:
> > Have you tested this with scsi_mod.use_blk_mq=n?
> >
> > Trying sim
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 04:43:15AM +, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
wrote:
> However, it was looking at scmd->tag, which is always 0xff (at
> least in those early discovery commands). scmd->request->tag
> looks like it is the field that has the correct values.
>
> Also, I noticed that s
On 10/23/14 19:43, Webb Scales wrote:
On 10/23/14 3:16 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
All my tests with use_blk_mq=n were run with a WARN_ON_ONCE(req->tag <
0) statement present in srp_queuecommand(). I haven't seen any kernel
warning being triggered during the tests I ran.
Bart, what's the data t
On 10/24/14 2:45 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 10/23/14 19:43, Webb Scales wrote:
On 10/23/14 3:16 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
All my tests with use_blk_mq=n were run with a WARN_ON_ONCE(req->tag <
0) statement present in srp_queuecommand(). I haven't seen any kernel
warning being triggered duri
On 10/24/2014 08:45 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 04:43:15AM +, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
> wrote:
>> However, it was looking at scmd->tag, which is always 0xff (at
>> least in those early discovery commands). scmd->request->tag
>> looks like it is the field
bastian Parschauer;
Ming
> Lei; linux-s...@vger.kernel.org; linux-rdma; Scales, Webb; Don Brace
(PMC)
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/12] IB/srp: Use block layer tags
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 04:43:15AM +, Elliott, Robert (Server
Storage)
> wrote:
> > However, it was looking
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 01:22:18PM +0530, Kashyap Desai wrote:
> I also used below setting in slave_alloc(), so that first Inquiry command
> received by driver also has valid Tag in (Non-MQ mode).
> sdev->tagged_supported = 1
> Without above setting Inquiry command comes with 0xFF. If I see b
14 matches
Mail list logo
