Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH] ALUA support for PURE FlashArray

2019-10-04 Thread Xose Vazquez Perez
On 10/4/19 10:51 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: On 6/26/19 7:37 PM, Brian Bunker wrote: It has been some time since we updated our PURE FlashArray configuration. The Linux vendors that we had been seeing in the field were using very old versions of multipath-tools, so we haven’t needed to chang

Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH] ALUA support for PURE FlashArray

2019-10-04 Thread Xose Vazquez Perez
On 6/26/19 7:37 PM, Brian Bunker wrote: It has been some time since we updated our PURE FlashArray configuration. The Linux vendors that we had been seeing in the field were using very old versions of multipath-tools, so we haven’t needed to change anything for some time. With the release of RHE

Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH] ALUA support for PURE FlashArray

2019-09-12 Thread Xose Vazquez Perez
On 9/12/19 3:52 AM, Brian Bunker wrote: > I am not sure if the max_sectors_kb is a kernel or udev bug. What I would > expect is for the block limits > INQUIRY VPD page, 0xB0, to be used to populate the /sys/block entries for > max_sectors_kb. We have > seen Linux distributions that don’t seem

Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH] ALUA support for PURE FlashArray

2019-09-11 Thread Brian Bunker
Xose, I just saw this. Sorry for the late response. I am not sure if the max_sectors_kb is a kernel or udev bug. What I would expect is for the block limits INQUIRY VPD page, 0xB0, to be used to populate the /sys/block entries for max_sectors_kb. We have seen Linux distributions that don’t s

Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH] ALUA support for PURE FlashArray

2019-08-07 Thread Xose Vazquez Perez
On 6/26/19 7:37 PM, Brian Bunker wrote: > It has been some time since we updated our PURE FlashArray configuration. The > Linux vendors that we had been seeing in the field were using very old > versions > of multipath-tools, so we haven’t needed to change anything for some time. > With > the re