On Jan 29, 2008 9:42 PM, James Bottomley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As an SCST user, I would like to see the SCST kernel code integrated
in the mainstream kernel because of its excellent performance on an
InfiniBand network. Since the SCST project comprises about 14 KLOC,
reviewing the SCST
On Jan 30, 2008 12:32 AM, FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
iSER has parameters to limit the maximum size of RDMA (it needs to
repeat RDMA with a poor configuration)?
Please specify which parameters you are referring to. As you know I
had already repeated my tests with ridiculously high
On Wed, Jan 30 2008, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 11:10 -0800, Matthew Dharm wrote:
For some reason, usb_sg_init is boned during auto-sense.
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:38:04 +0100
Bart Van Assche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 30, 2008 12:32 AM, FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
iSER has parameters to limit the maximum size of RDMA (it needs to
repeat RDMA with a poor configuration)?
Please specify which parameters you
We've tried new adaptec firmware shipped with SLES and we got
ourselves new error string that appears just above error messages that you
have seen before and that were attached to the original message:
kernel: aic94xx: escb_tasklet_complete: REQ_TASK_ABORT, reason=0x6
kernel: aic94xx:
James Bottomley wrote:
The two target architectures perform essentially identical functions, so
there's only really room for one in the kernel. Right at the moment,
it's STGT. Problems in STGT come from the user-kernel boundary which
can be mitigated in a variety of ways. The fact that the
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:31:52 -0800
Roland Dreier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
. . STGT read SCST read.STGT read
SCST read.
. . performance performance . performance
performance .
.
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:38:04 +0100
Bart Van Assche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 30, 2008 12:32 AM, FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
iSER has parameters to limit the maximum size of RDMA (it needs to
repeat RDMA with a poor configuration)?
Please specify
On 01/30/2008 05:14 PM, Jan Sembera wrote:
We tried firmware versions V28, V30, and even V32 that is, as
far as I know, not yet available on adaptec website. All of them were
unfortunately displaying exactly the same behaviour :-(. Did you get your
SAS controller working? And if so,
On Jan 30, 2008 11:56 AM, FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:38:04 +0100
Bart Van Assche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please specify which parameters you are referring to. As you know I
Sorry, I can't say. I don't know much about iSER. But seems that Pete
and
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 11:38 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30 2008, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 11:10 -0800, Matthew Dharm wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:10:47 +0100
Bart Van Assche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 30, 2008 11:56 AM, FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:38:04 +0100
Bart Van Assche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please specify which parameters you are referring to. As you know I
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 09:29 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On Jan 29, 2008 9:42 PM, James Bottomley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As an SCST user, I would like to see the SCST kernel code integrated
in the mainstream kernel because of its excellent performance on an
InfiniBand network. Since
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 09:38 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On Jan 30, 2008 12:32 AM, FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
iSER has parameters to limit the maximum size of RDMA (it needs to
repeat RDMA with a poor configuration)?
Please specify which parameters you are referring to.
On Jan 30, 2008 5:34 PM, James Bottomley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 09:38 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On Jan 30, 2008 12:32 AM, FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
iSER has parameters to limit the maximum size of RDMA (it needs to
repeat RDMA with a poor
Robert Hancock wrote:
Luben Tuikov wrote:
--- On Mon, 1/28/08, Robert Hancock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The trick is that if an ATAPI device is connected, we (as
far as I'm aware) can't use ADMA mode, so we have to switch that
port into legacy mode.
Can you double check this with the HW
Mark Lord wrote:
..
Commands which were not ADMA compatible (eg. MODE_SENSE,
TEST_UNIT_READY, ..)
were simply handled with PIO (in the driver) rather than any form of DMA,
which is okay because those commands are relatively infrequent.
..
A slight correction there: TEST_UNIT_READY was fine
On Jan 30, 2008 5:22 PM, James Bottomley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Deciding what lives in userspace and what should be in the kernel lies
at the very heart of architectural decisions. However, the argument
that it should be in the kernel because that would make it faster is
pretty much a
On Wed, Jan 30 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 11:38 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30 2008, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
On Tue,
On Wed, Jan 30 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 11:38 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30 2008, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 06:59:34PM +0800, Keith Hopkins wrote:
V28. My controller functions well with a single drive (low-medium load).
Unfortunately, all attempts to get the mirrors in sync fail and usually hang
the whole box.
Adaptec posted a V30 sequencer on their website; does that
This patch fixes the following section mismatches:
-- snip --
...
WARNING: drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.o(.devexit.text+0x8): Section mismatch in
reference from the function qpti_sbus_remove() to the function
.init.text:qpti_chain_del()
WARNING: drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.o(.devinit.text+0x56c):
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 22:03 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
This patch fixes the following section mismatches:
-- snip --
...
WARNING: drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.o(.devexit.text+0x8): Section mismatch in
reference from the function qpti_sbus_remove() to the function
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:00:16PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 22:03 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
This patch fixes the following section mismatches:
-- snip --
...
WARNING: drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.o(.devexit.text+0x8): Section mismatch in
reference from
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 10:20:11PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:00:16PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
...
To my understanding Adrian just fixed a potential oops.
You have a driver that surely are thought to be hotplugable -
otherwise qpti_sbus_probe() would not have
Nagendra Tomar wrote:
Hello James,
My understanding is that the scsi_device in SDEV_DEL state
is there in the scsi_host-devices/scsi_target-devices queue, just
because there is some outstanding command holding a reference to it.
Well, there's a lot more reasons than just an
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 22:20 +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:00:16PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 22:03 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
This patch fixes the following section mismatches:
-- snip --
...
WARNING:
This isn't the final update I promised, most of this is fixing bugs in
the previous update which became more evident with wider testing (a
nasty set of cases where we have cmnd-sense_buffer instead of
cmnd-sense_buffer[0] which cause problems now that sense_buffer is a
pointer instead and a bug in
I'm just reflecting that all of the
problems would go away and we'd save thousands of person hours on the
infrastructure and bug fixing if we simply #defined most of the
sectional annotations to be nops.
So far I have only seen three persons being really active in fixing the
section mismatch
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:00:16PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 22:03 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
This patch fixes the following section mismatches:
-- snip --
...
WARNING: drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.o(.devexit.text+0x8): Section mismatch in
reference from
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:41:35PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 22:20 +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:00:16PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
...
__init is possibly justifiable with a few hundred k savings on boot.
__devinit and the rest are
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 00:32 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:41:35PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 22:20 +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 03:00:16PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
...
__init is possibly justifiable with a few
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 04:44:12PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 00:32 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
People at linux-arch (Cc'ed) might be better at explaining how often
CONFIG_HOTPLUG gets used in real-life systems and how big the savings
are there.
That might be a
Mark Lord wrote:
Robert Hancock wrote:
Luben Tuikov wrote:
--- On Mon, 1/28/08, Robert Hancock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The trick is that if an ATAPI device is connected, we (as
far as I'm aware) can't use ADMA mode, so we have to switch that
port into legacy mode.
Can you double check this
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 02:09:52PM -0800, Luben Tuikov wrote:
The ideal solution would be to do mapping against a
different struct
device for each port, so that we could maintain the proper
DMA mask for
each of them at all times. However I'm not sure if
that's possible. The
Some people consider it worth it for their memory restricted systems
and would like to drive the annotations even further. [1]
They could get much better bang-for-the-buck (as in memory saved
for amount of work invested) by tackling some the dynamic memory allocation
pigs.
In general it's a
On Jan 30, 2008 2:54 PM, FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:10:47 +0100
Bart Van Assche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 30, 2008 11:56 AM, FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, I can't say. I don't know much about iSER. But seems that Pete
and
I don't deny we can invest large amounts of work to fix our current
issues and build large scriptable checks to ensure we keep it fixed ...
I'm just asking if, at the end of the day, it's really worth it.
Some people consider it worth it for their memory restricted systems
and would
38 matches
Mail list logo
