| Message ID | 1311196948.5505.10779.camel@chandra-lucid.beaverton.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Deferred, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 14:22 -0700, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > rdac hardware handler assumes that there is one-to-one relation ship > between the host and the controller w.r.t lun. IOW, it does not > support "multiple storage partitions" within a storage. > > Example: > HBA1 and HBA2 see lun 0 and 1 in storage A (1) > HBA3 and HBA4 see lun 0 and 1 in storage A (2) > HBA5 and HBA6 see lun 0 and 1 in storage A (3) > > luns 0 and 1 in (1), (2) and (3) are totally different. > > But, rdac handler treats the lun 0s (and lun 1s) as the same when > sending a mode select to the controller, which is wrong. > > This patch makes the rdac hardware handler associate HBA and the > storage w.r.t lun (and not the host itself). > > Signed-off-by: Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@us.ibm.com> > --- > drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c | 10 +++++++--- > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) This doesn't apply; patching file drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 158 (offset 9 lines). Hunk #2 FAILED at 381. Hunk #3 FAILED at 389. Hunk #4 FAILED at 403. Hunk #5 FAILED at 526. 4 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c.rej it looks like there's a missing intermediate patch somewhere, can you check scsi-misc and tell me what it is? Thanks, James -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
Oops. Sorry. By mistake sent an earlier version. Will send the correct version. On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 14:34 +0400, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 14:22 -0700, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > rdac hardware handler assumes that there is one-to-one relation ship > > between the host and the controller w.r.t lun. IOW, it does not > > support "multiple storage partitions" within a storage. > > > > Example: > > HBA1 and HBA2 see lun 0 and 1 in storage A (1) > > HBA3 and HBA4 see lun 0 and 1 in storage A (2) > > HBA5 and HBA6 see lun 0 and 1 in storage A (3) > > > > luns 0 and 1 in (1), (2) and (3) are totally different. > > > > But, rdac handler treats the lun 0s (and lun 1s) as the same when > > sending a mode select to the controller, which is wrong. > > > > This patch makes the rdac hardware handler associate HBA and the > > storage w.r.t lun (and not the host itself). > > > > Signed-off-by: Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@us.ibm.com> > > --- > > drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c | 10 +++++++--- > > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > This doesn't apply; > > patching file drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c > Hunk #1 succeeded at 158 (offset 9 lines). > Hunk #2 FAILED at 381. > Hunk #3 FAILED at 389. > Hunk #4 FAILED at 403. > Hunk #5 FAILED at 526. > 4 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file > drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c.rej > > > it looks like there's a missing intermediate patch somewhere, can you > check scsi-misc and tell me what it is? > > Thanks, > > James > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c b/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c index 214d7f0..67c2c99 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c @@ -149,6 +149,7 @@ struct rdac_controller { } mode_select; u8 index; u8 array_name[ARRAY_LABEL_LEN]; + struct Scsi_Host *host; spinlock_t ms_lock; int ms_queued; struct work_struct ms_work; @@ -380,7 +381,7 @@ static void release_controller(struct kref *kref) } static struct rdac_controller *get_controller(u8 *serial, int index, - char *array_name) + char *array_name, struct scsi_device *sdev) { struct rdac_controller *ctlr, *tmp; @@ -388,7 +389,8 @@ static struct rdac_controller *get_controller(u8 *serial, int index, list_for_each_entry(tmp, &ctlr_list, node) { if ((memcmp(tmp->serial, serial, SERIAL_NO_LEN) == 0) && - (tmp->index == index)) { + (tmp->index == index) && + (tmp->host == sdev->host)) { kref_get(&tmp->kref); spin_unlock(&list_lock); return tmp; @@ -402,6 +404,7 @@ static struct rdac_controller *get_controller(u8 *serial, int index, memcpy(ctlr->serial, serial, SERIAL_NO_LEN); memcpy(ctlr->array_name, array_name, ARRAY_LABEL_LEN); ctlr->index = index; + ctlr->host = sdev->host; kref_init(&ctlr->kref); ctlr->use_ms10 = -1; @@ -525,7 +528,8 @@ static int initialize_controller(struct scsi_device *sdev, if (err != SCSI_DH_OK) return err; inq_p80 = &h->inq.p80; - h->ctlr = get_controller(inq_p80->serial, index, array_name); + h->ctlr = get_controller(inq_p80->serial, index, + array_name, sdev); if (!h->ctlr) err = SCSI_DH_RES_TEMP_UNAVAIL; }
rdac hardware handler assumes that there is one-to-one relation ship between the host and the controller w.r.t lun. IOW, it does not support "multiple storage partitions" within a storage. Example: HBA1 and HBA2 see lun 0 and 1 in storage A (1) HBA3 and HBA4 see lun 0 and 1 in storage A (2) HBA5 and HBA6 see lun 0 and 1 in storage A (3) luns 0 and 1 in (1), (2) and (3) are totally different. But, rdac handler treats the lun 0s (and lun 1s) as the same when sending a mode select to the controller, which is wrong. This patch makes the rdac hardware handler associate HBA and the storage w.r.t lun (and not the host itself). Signed-off-by: Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@us.ibm.com> --- drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_rdac.c | 10 +++++++--- 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)