On 10/23/2014 11:14 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 01:49:07PM +0300, Meelis Roos wrote:
>>> ping?
>>
>> Sorry, forgot to reply. Yes, it worked fine, on the initial Ultra 1 and
>> additionally on Ultra 2 too.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Can I get a review from Jens and some SCSI devel
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 01:49:07PM +0300, Meelis Roos wrote:
> > ping?
>
> Sorry, forgot to reply. Yes, it worked fine, on the initial Ultra 1 and
> additionally on Ultra 2 too.
Thanks!
Can I get a review from Jens and some SCSI developers, too?
Jens, are you fine taking the blkdev.h revert th
> ping?
Sorry, forgot to reply. Yes, it worked fine, on the initial Ultra 1 and
additionally on Ultra 2 too.
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 05:13:56PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Fix the assumption that we can treat all blk-mq requests as tagged. For
> > traditional SCSI that's wrong, as bei
ping?
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 05:13:56PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Fix the assumption that we can treat all blk-mq requests as tagged. For
> traditional SCSI that's wrong, as being tagged has a very explicit meaning
> on the wire.
>
> This is a little bit different from the version Meeli
Fix the assumption that we can treat all blk-mq requests as tagged. For
traditional SCSI that's wrong, as being tagged has a very explicit meaning
on the wire.
This is a little bit different from the version Meelis tested earlier, but
the concept is the same. I didn't want to add a Tested-by tag
5 matches
Mail list logo