Re: Some NCQ numbers...

2007-07-03 Thread Tejun Heo
Michael Tokarev wrote: [Offtopic notice: For the first time I demonstrated some speed testing results on linux-ide mailinglist, as a demonstration how [NT]CQ can help. But later, someone becomes curious and posted that email to lkml, asking for more details. Since that, I become more

[PATCH]mpt fusion: add sysfs attributes to display IOC parameters

2007-07-03 Thread Prakash, Sathya
New sysfs scsi_host attributes are added to provide information about, Firmware version, BIOS version, Driver version, MPI version and other product related information. Signed-off-by: Sathya Prakash [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- diff -Naurp b/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c

Re: [PATCH]mpt fusion: add sysfs attributes to display IOC parameters

2007-07-03 Thread Brian King
Prakash, Sathya wrote: +static void +mpt_get_manufacturing_pg_0(MPT_ADAPTER *ioc) +{ + + memcpy(ioc-board_name, pbuf-BoardName, 16); + memcpy(ioc-board_assembly, pbuf-BoardAssembly, 16); + memcpy(ioc-board_tracer, pbuf-BoardTracerNumber, 16); Are these guaranteed to be NULL

Is scsi_reset_provider() overdoing it?

2007-07-03 Thread Boaz Harrosh
In scsi_error.c at scsi_reset_provider() Why do we need the uninitialized struct request hanging on the reset scsi_cmnd? It looks like we are bypassing block queues and directly going to llds. It also looks like llds understand not to touch any garbage request's fields during reset. Would it

mpt boot trouble 2.6.21, 2.6.22-rcX regression

2007-07-03 Thread maximilian attems
forwarding latest message to this boot trouble report http://bugs.debian.org/425851 - Forwarded message from Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Subject: Bug#425851: Processed: (no subject) From: Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 16:29:24 +0200 Cc: Olaf van

RE: [PATCH]mpt fusion: add sysfs attributes to display IOC parameters

2007-07-03 Thread Patrick_Boyd
diff -Naurp b/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.h a/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.h --- b/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.h 2007-07-02 16:20:46.0 +0530 +++ a/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.h 2007-07-03 18:13:28.0 +0530 @@ -78,6 +78,10 @@ #define MPT_LINUX_VERSION_COMMON 3.04.05

Re: Some NCQ numbers...

2007-07-03 Thread Michael Tokarev
Tejun Heo wrote: Michael Tokarev wrote: [] A test drive is Seagate Barracuda ST3250620AS desktop drive, 250Gb, cache size is 16Mb, 7200RPM. [test shows that NCQ makes no difference whatsoever] And which elevator? Well. It looks like the results does not depend on the elevator. Originally I

[PATCH 1/4] scsi: megaraid_sas -- add hibernation support

2007-07-03 Thread bo yang
The megaraid_sas driver doesn't support the hibernation, the suspend/resume routine implemented to support the hibernation. Signed-off-by: Bo Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- drivers/scsi/megaraid/megaraid_sas.c | 308 +++-- drivers/scsi/megaraid/megaraid_sas.h |1 2 files

Re: [PATCH 2/4] scsi: megaraid_sas -- add module param fast_load

2007-07-03 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:42:33 -0400 bo yang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Driver will skip physical devices scan for the first time if the fast_load is set. All your patches are wordwrapped and will need to be resent. Also, there are multiple trivial errors in here, pretty much all of which would

[PATCH 1/4] scsi: megaraid_sas -- add hibernation support

2007-07-03 Thread bo yang
The megaraid_sas driver doesn't support the hibernation, the suspend/resume routine implemented to support the hibernation. Signed-off-by: Bo Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- drivers/scsi/megaraid/megaraid_sas.c | 308 +++-- drivers/scsi/megaraid/megaraid_sas.h |1 2 files

Re: [PATCH 1/4] scsi: megaraid_sas -- add hibernation support

2007-07-03 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:31:23 -0400 bo yang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The megaraid_sas driver doesn't support the hibernation, the suspend/resume routine implemented to support the hibernation. Signed-off-by: Bo Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- drivers/scsi/megaraid/megaraid_sas.c | 308

Re: Some NCQ numbers...

2007-07-03 Thread Tejun Heo
Hello, Michael Tokarev wrote: Well. It looks like the results does not depend on the elevator. Originally I tried with deadline, and just re-ran the test with noop (hence the long delay with the answer) - changing linux elevator changes almost nothing in the results - modulo some random

Re: [PATCH] lpfc: convert to use the data buffer accessors - part 2

2007-07-03 Thread James Smart
ACK - missed in our merge. Thank You... -- james s Boaz Harrosh wrote: This is an addendum to: commit a0b4f78f9a4c869e9b29f254054ad7441cb40bbf Author: FUJITA Tomonori [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SCSI] lpfc: convert to use the data buffer accessors One place was missed in the merge