On Jan 18, 2008 1:08 PM, Vladislav Bolkhovitin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ ... ]
So, seems I understood your slides correctly: the more valuable data for
our SCST SRP vs STGT iSER comparison should be on page 26 for 1 command
read (~480MB/s, i.e. ~60% from Bart's result on the equivalent
James Bottomley wrote:
On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 20:27 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
James Bottomley wrote:
Plus what is the rq-nr_sectors sdp-sector_size /
512 test supposed to be doing? that being true is supposed to be a
guarantee of the block layer (and if something goes wrong there's a
check
Hi all,
This patch adds a new scsi_device flag for devices which contain a bug where
the device crashes when the last sector is read in a larger then 1 sector read.
This is for example the case with sdcards in the HP PSC1350 printer cardreader
and in the HP PSC1610 printer cardreader.
Hi all,
This patch sets the last_sector_bug flag to 1 for all USB disks. This is
needed to makes the cardreader on various HP multifunction printers work.
Since the performance impact is negible we set this flag for all USB disks to
avoid an unusual_devs.h nightmare.
Note that this patch
On Wed, Jan 16 2008 at 6:32 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is the third version of:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsim=120038907123706w=2
The changes from the second version are:
- Fixed the memory leak bug that Boaz pointed out.
shots-backup_sense_buffer has gone.
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:32:17PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
This removes static array sense_buffer in scsi_cmnd and uses
dynamically allocated sense_buffer (with GFP_DMA).
The reason for doing this is that some architectures need cacheline
aligned buffer for DMA:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 11:12 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi all,
This patch adds a new scsi_device flag for devices which contain a bug where
the device crashes when the last sector is read in a larger then 1 sector
read.
This is for example the case with sdcards in the HP PSC1350
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 13:32 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
This is the third version of:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsim=120038907123706w=2
[...]
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi.c
index 54ff611..0a4a5b8 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi.c
@@
James Bottomley wrote:
The macro tells us whether the device is (or contains) an enclosure device.
...
+static inline int scsi_device_enclosure(struct scsi_device *sdev)
+{
+ return sdev-inquiry[6] (16);
+}
Perhaps call it scsi_device_is_enclosure() to better reflect the nature
of this
On Tue, Jan 15 2008 at 19:52 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this patch depends on the sg branch of the block tree
James
---
From: James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:11:46 -0600
Subject: remove use_sg_chaining
With the sg table code, every SCSI
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:18 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15 2008 at 19:52 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this patch depends on the sg branch of the block tree
James
---
From: James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:11:46 -0600
On Sun, Jan 20 2008 at 21:24 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:18 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15 2008 at 19:52 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
this patch depends on the sg branch of the block tree
James
---
From: James
On Sun, Jan 20 2008 at 21:29 +0200, Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:18 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15 2008 at 19:52 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
this patch depends on the sg branch of the
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008 at 21:29 +0200, Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:18 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15 2008 at 19:52 +0200,
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:18 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15 2008 at 19:52 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
this patch depends on the sg branch of the block tree
James
---
From: James Bottomley [EMAIL
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008 at 21:24 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:18 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15 2008 at 19:52 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
this patch depends on the sg branch of
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008 at 21:29 +0200, Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:18 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15 2008 at 19:52 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:54 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008 at 21:24 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:18 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15 2008 at 19:52 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
this patch depends on
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 11:12:26AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi all,
This patch adds a new scsi_device flag for devices which contain a bug
where
the device crashes when the last sector is read in a larger then 1 sector
read.
This is for example the case with sdcards in the HP PSC1350
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 11:27:29AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi all,
This patch sets the last_sector_bug flag to 1 for all USB disks. This is
needed to makes the cardreader on various HP multifunction printers work.
Since the performance impact is negible we set this flag for all USB disks
James Bottomley wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 12:56 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 11:27:29AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi all,
This patch sets the last_sector_bug flag to 1 for all USB disks. This is
needed to makes the cardreader on various HP multifunction printers work.
Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 11:12:26AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi all,
This patch adds a new scsi_device flag for devices which contain a bug
where
the device crashes when the last sector is read in a larger then 1 sector
read.
This is for example the case with sdcards in
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:01 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008 at 21:29 +0200, Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:18 +0200,
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 12:56 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 11:27:29AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi all,
This patch sets the last_sector_bug flag to 1 for all USB disks. This is
needed to makes the cardreader on various HP multifunction printers work.
Since the
Le dimanche 20 janvier 2008 à 15:03 -0600, James Bottomley a écrit :
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 12:56 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 11:27:29AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi all,
This patch sets the last_sector_bug flag to 1 for all USB disks. This is
needed to makes the
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 18:44 +0100, Stefan Richter wrote:
James Bottomley wrote:
The macro tells us whether the device is (or contains) an enclosure device.
...
+static inline int scsi_device_enclosure(struct scsi_device *sdev)
+{
+ return sdev-inquiry[6] (16);
+}
Perhaps call it
Hello James:
I read your comments.
.target_alloc = sas_target_alloc,
.slave_configure= sas_slave_configure,
.slave_destroy = sas_slave_destroy,
.change_queue_depth = sas_change_queue_depth,
.change_queue_type =
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 09:40:11 -0700
Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:32:17PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
This removes static array sense_buffer in scsi_cmnd and uses
dynamically allocated sense_buffer (with GFP_DMA).
The reason for doing this is that
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 10:36:56 -0600
James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 13:32 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
This is the third version of:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsim=120038907123706w=2
[...]
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi.c
index
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 21:54:21 +0200
Boaz Harrosh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20 2008 at 21:24 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 21:18 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15 2008 at 19:52 +0200, James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
this
30 matches
Mail list logo
