Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] scsi: enclosure support
On 08/04/2017 08:10 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> On 08/03/2017 05:10 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> On 03/08/2017 15:26, Hannes Reinecke wrote: Hi all, due to a customer issue I've added simple subenclosure support to the SCSI emulation. The patch simply converts the current invisible LUN0 into an enclosure device; existing setups using LUN0 as disks or CD-ROMs will not be affected. >>> >>> What is the issue exactly? That is, for what is it necessary to have a >>> dummy enclosure? >>> >> Well, stock linux displays some very interesting error messages for >> these types of enclosures. Which was the prime mover for doing this. > > --verbose? > [ 12.958454] scsi 1:0:0:254: Wrong diagnostic page; asked for 2 got 0 [ 12.958456] scsi 1:0:0:254: Failed to get diagnostic page 0xffea [ 12.958457] scsi 1:0:0:254: Failed to bind enclosure -19 [ 12.959392] ses 1:0:0:254: Attached Enclosure device >>> I agree with Dan that this need machine type compatibility gunk. For >>> example, could the new device affect /dev/sgN numbering? >> >> Yes, indeed it would. >> >> What about a new option to the scsi driver? > > If you do that, you've done 99% of the work to do compatibility so I > won't complain and do the 1% myself. :) > Okay, will be doing so. Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes ReineckeTeamlead Storage & Networking h...@suse.de +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] scsi: enclosure support
> On 08/03/2017 05:10 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 03/08/2017 15:26, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> due to a customer issue I've added simple subenclosure support > >> to the SCSI emulation. The patch simply converts the current invisible > >> LUN0 into an enclosure device; existing setups using LUN0 as disks or > >> CD-ROMs will not be affected. > > > > What is the issue exactly? That is, for what is it necessary to have a > > dummy enclosure? > > > Well, stock linux displays some very interesting error messages for > these types of enclosures. Which was the prime mover for doing this. --verbose? > > I agree with Dan that this need machine type compatibility gunk. For > > example, could the new device affect /dev/sgN numbering? > > Yes, indeed it would. > > What about a new option to the scsi driver? If you do that, you've done 99% of the work to do compatibility so I won't complain and do the 1% myself. :) Paolo
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] scsi: enclosure support
On 08/03/2017 05:10 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 03/08/2017 15:26, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> due to a customer issue I've added simple subenclosure support >> to the SCSI emulation. The patch simply converts the current invisible >> LUN0 into an enclosure device; existing setups using LUN0 as disks or >> CD-ROMs will not be affected. > > What is the issue exactly? That is, for what is it necessary to have a > dummy enclosure? > Well, stock linux displays some very interesting error messages for these types of enclosures. Which was the prime mover for doing this. > I agree with Dan that this need machine type compatibility gunk. For > example, could the new device affect /dev/sgN numbering? > Yes, indeed it would. What about a new option to the scsi driver? With that each user could selectively enable it, and we wouldn't need to worry with machine type compability... Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes ReineckeTeamlead Storage & Networking h...@suse.de +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] scsi: enclosure support
On 03/08/2017 15:26, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > Hi all, > > due to a customer issue I've added simple subenclosure support > to the SCSI emulation. The patch simply converts the current invisible > LUN0 into an enclosure device; existing setups using LUN0 as disks or > CD-ROMs will not be affected. What is the issue exactly? That is, for what is it necessary to have a dummy enclosure? I agree with Dan that this need machine type compatibility gunk. For example, could the new device affect /dev/sgN numbering? Paolo