Re: [PATCH 2/6] cxlflash: Fix to avoid virtual LUN failover failure

2015-12-17 Thread Uma Krishnan
On 12/10/2015 4:53 PM, Uma Krishnan wrote: From: "Matthew R. Ochs" Applications which use virtual LUN's that are backed by a physical LUN over both adapter ports may experience an I/O failure in the event of a link loss (e.g. cable pull). Virtual LUNs may be accessed through one or both ports

Re: [PATCH 2/6] cxlflash: Fix to avoid virtual LUN failover failure

2015-12-13 Thread Daniel Axtens
> Virtual LUNs may be accessed through one or both ports of the adapter. Is it possible that there might ever be adapters with a number of ports other than 2? In particular, is it possible for 3 or 4 port adapters to exist? If so, do you need something with a bit more fidelity? If not, this is

Re: [PATCH 2/6] cxlflash: Fix to avoid virtual LUN failover failure

2015-12-11 Thread Manoj Kumar
On 12/10/2015 4:53 PM, Uma Krishnan wrote: From: "Matthew R. Ochs" To remedy this scenario, provide feedback back to the application on virtual LUN creation as to which ports the LUN may be accessed. LUN's spanning both ports are candidates for a retry in a presence of an I/O failure. Signed-of

[PATCH 2/6] cxlflash: Fix to avoid virtual LUN failover failure

2015-12-10 Thread Uma Krishnan
From: "Matthew R. Ochs" Applications which use virtual LUN's that are backed by a physical LUN over both adapter ports may experience an I/O failure in the event of a link loss (e.g. cable pull). Virtual LUNs may be accessed through one or both ports of the adapter. This access is encoded in the