On 11/12/12 23:51, Or Gerlitz wrote:
Bart Van Assche <[email protected]> wrote:
This patch series makes the ib_srp driver better suited for use in a H.A. setup
because:
- multipathd is notified faster about transport layer failures.
- Transport layer failures reliably result in SCSI host removal.
- Switchover can be triggered explicitly by deleting an initiator device.
- Disconnecting from a target without unloading ib_srp is now possible.
Hi Bart,
Few more questions/comments,
The individual patches are:
0001-ib_srp-Enlarge-block-layer-timeout.patch
0002-ib_srp-Eliminate-state-SRP_TARGET_CONNECTING.patch
0003-ib_srp-Introduce-srp_handle_qp_err.patch
0004-ib_srp-Suppress-superfluous-error-messages.patch
0005-ib_srp-Avoid-that-SCSI-error-handling-causes-trouble.patch
0006-ib_srp-Introduce-the-helper-function-srp_remove_targ.patch
0007-ib_srp-Eliminate-state-SRP_TARGET_DEAD.patch
0008-ib_srp-Keep-processing-commands-during-host-removal.patch
0009-ib_srp-Make-srp_disconnect_target-wait-for-IB-comple.patch
0010-ib_srp-Document-sysfs-attributes.patch
0011-srp_transport-Fix-atttribute-registration.patch
0012-srp_transport-Simplify-attribute-initialization-code.patch
0013-srp_transport-Document-sysfs-attributes.patch
0014-ib_srp-Allow-SRP-disconnect-through-sysfs.patch
0015-ib_srp-Maintain-a-single-connection-per-I_T-nexus.patch
0016-srp_transport-Add-transport-layer-error-handling.patch
0017-ib_srp-Add-dev_loss_tmo-support.patch
0018-ib_srp-Remove-SCSI-devices-upon-port-down-event.patch
0019-scsi_transport_srp-Fail-I-O-faster.patch
I understand that as a whole, this series makes SRP to function better
in HA schemes, however, can you break this list of patches to cleanups,
new functionality and actual HA related bug fixes and concrete
improvements. Also, if you can spare some high level words on the
design directions/decisions taken as the patch series evolved, as this
effort in underway for some time now.
The goal of this patch series is to reduce path failover time in a
multipath setup. I've done my best to indicate in the patch descriptions
which patches are cleanup patches and which patches introduce new
functionality. Which patches should be considered bug fixes depends on
what is considered a bug - is it e.g. considered a bug that it can take
more than 60s with the upstream SRP initiator before multipathd switches
paths ? Is it considered a bug that the upstream SRP initiator does not
remove SCSI hosts that correspond to failed paths ?
Also for V6 -- next-time -- etc, please make sure to have Vn to appear
in the [PATCH] brackets, as it critical when folks browse between
different versions/postings of your to the same patch set, if you use
git format-patch, this is easily achieved with --subject-prefix="PATCH
Vn"
Thanks, will do.
Bart.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
