>>
>> Please repost the series against the current tree. Also a cover
>> letter with a bit more explanation would be good.
>>
>
> Great, I think that my colleagues can send an updated version next week.
I will send a new version with a cover letter these days, before that, we need
to do a
>>
>> Please repost the series against the current tree. Also a cover
>> letter with a bit more explanation would be good.
>>
>
> Great, I think that my colleagues can send an updated version next week.
I will send a new version with a cover letter these days, before that, we need
to do a
On 21/04/2017 12:20, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:57:37AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
On 21/04/2017 09:39, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
wangyijing already sent an RFC for fixing this issue (mentioned above),
which was a signifiagnt rewrite of some of libsas.
I am hoping that
On 21/04/2017 12:20, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:57:37AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
On 21/04/2017 09:39, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
wangyijing already sent an RFC for fixing this issue (mentioned above),
which was a signifiagnt rewrite of some of libsas.
I am hoping that
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:19:41PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Any reason to not just make sas_remove_host call scsi_remove_host
> to ensure we get the ordering right?
No other than "haven't thought of it". But let me double check the LLDDs fist.
--
Johannes Thumshirn
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 01:19:41PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Any reason to not just make sas_remove_host call scsi_remove_host
> to ensure we get the ordering right?
No other than "haven't thought of it". But let me double check the LLDDs fist.
--
Johannes Thumshirn
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:57:37AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> On 21/04/2017 09:39, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>>> wangyijing already sent an RFC for fixing this issue (mentioned above),
>>> > which was a signifiagnt rewrite of some of libsas.
>>> > I am hoping that he would retry, and that
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:57:37AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> On 21/04/2017 09:39, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>>> wangyijing already sent an RFC for fixing this issue (mentioned above),
>>> > which was a signifiagnt rewrite of some of libsas.
>>> > I am hoping that he would retry, and that
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:04:45AM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> This series re-orders the calls to scsi_remove_host() and sas_remove_host() in
> all SAS HBA drivers (apart from mpt3sas which is doing it correctly). This is
> for two reasons:
> 1) After the change to recursive removal
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:04:45AM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> This series re-orders the calls to scsi_remove_host() and sas_remove_host() in
> all SAS HBA drivers (apart from mpt3sas which is doing it correctly). This is
> for two reasons:
> 1) After the change to recursive removal
On 21/04/2017 09:39, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
wangyijing already sent an RFC for fixing this issue (mentioned above),
> which was a signifiagnt rewrite of some of libsas.
> I am hoping that he would retry, and that community would support/shepherd
> this activity, or at least say it will be
On 21/04/2017 09:39, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
wangyijing already sent an RFC for fixing this issue (mentioned above),
> which was a signifiagnt rewrite of some of libsas.
> I am hoping that he would retry, and that community would support/shepherd
> this activity, or at least say it will be
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:34:18AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> Thanks Johannes.
>
> @wangyijing, can you test this patchset please (specifically 3/5)? I know
> that you have the modified version of libsas which you dabbled with
> upstreaming.
>
> On 21/04/2017 09:04, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:34:18AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> Thanks Johannes.
>
> @wangyijing, can you test this patchset please (specifically 3/5)? I know
> that you have the modified version of libsas which you dabbled with
> upstreaming.
>
> On 21/04/2017 09:04, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>
Thanks Johannes.
@wangyijing, can you test this patchset please (specifically 3/5)? I
know that you have the modified version of libsas which you dabbled with
upstreaming.
On 21/04/2017 09:04, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
This series re-orders the calls to scsi_remove_host() and
Thanks Johannes.
@wangyijing, can you test this patchset please (specifically 3/5)? I
know that you have the modified version of libsas which you dabbled with
upstreaming.
On 21/04/2017 09:04, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
This series re-orders the calls to scsi_remove_host() and
This series re-orders the calls to scsi_remove_host() and sas_remove_host() in
all SAS HBA drivers (apart from mpt3sas which is doing it correctly). This is
for two reasons:
1) After the change to recursive removal of sysfs entries, we're
trying to remove already removed
This series re-orders the calls to scsi_remove_host() and sas_remove_host() in
all SAS HBA drivers (apart from mpt3sas which is doing it correctly). This is
for two reasons:
1) After the change to recursive removal of sysfs entries, we're
trying to remove already removed
18 matches
Mail list logo
