On 07/22/2014 01:06 AM, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
Add blist flags to permit the reading of the VPD pages even when
the target may claim SPC-2 compliance. MSFT targets currently
claim SPC-2 compliance while they implement post SPC-2 features.
With this patch we can correctly handle WRITE_SAME_16 iss
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 07:15:58AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 03:10:28PM +0100, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
> > I'm not sure this alone will work - won't sdev_bflags/bflags have
> > already been built at this point?
>
> They've been built up, but we can still or new value
> "Sreekanth" == Sreekanth Reddy writes:
Sreekanth,
Sreekanth> 2. As per MPI Spec, each set of 8 reply descriptor post
Sreekanth> queues must have the same value for the upper 32-bits of
Sreekanth> their memory address. So allocated set of eight queues in a
Sreekanth> single pool and added a
Hi Martin,
Following are the changes that I have done in this patch over the
first RDPQ support patch,
1. As per your suggestion reduced the redundancy in the function
_base_release_memory_pools(), _base_allocate_memory_pools().
2. As per MPI Spec, each set of 8 reply descriptor post queues must
> -Original Message-
> From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:h...@infradead.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 7:10 AM
> To: Sitsofe Wheeler
> Cc: KY Srinivasan; gre...@linuxfoundation.org; linux-
> ker...@vger.kernel.org; de...@linuxdriverproject.org; oher...@suse.com;
> a...@canonical.com;
> -Original Message-
> From: Sitsofe Wheeler [mailto:sits...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 3:05 AM
> To: KY Srinivasan
> Cc: gre...@linuxfoundation.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org;
> de...@linuxdriverproject.org; oher...@suse.com; a...@canonical.com;
> jasow...@redhat.com;
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 07:10:14AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 01:54:43PM +0100, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
> > That's good to know (I was worried the device would not be detected as
> > supporting discard because it doesn't report lbpme and doesn't declare a
> > conforman
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 03:10:28PM +0100, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
> I'm not sure this alone will work - won't sdev_bflags/bflags have
> already been built at this point?
They've been built up, but we can still or new values into it. It looks
fine to me from review, but if you can test it on an act
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 04:06:01PM -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
> Add blist flags to permit the reading of the VPD pages even when
> the target may claim SPC-2 compliance. MSFT targets currently
> claim SPC-2 compliance while they implement post SPC-2 features.
> With this patch we can correctly
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 01:54:43PM +0100, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
> That's good to know (I was worried the device would not be detected as
> supporting discard because it doesn't report lbpme and doesn't declare a
> conformance version (see below)).
Ok, that makes things worse - you might be able t
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:51:28AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 11:04:48AM +0100, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
> > OK I've just seen this as I was about to post a similar patch to get
> > discard going on Hyper-V. Will your patches handle Hyper-V pass through
> > devices
> >
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 11:04:48AM +0100, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
> OK I've just seen this as I was about to post a similar patch to get
> discard going on Hyper-V. Will your patches handle Hyper-V pass through
> devices
> that support discard? The SSD I have here reports the following in the Linux
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 04:06:01PM -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
> Add blist flags to permit the reading of the VPD pages even when
> the target may claim SPC-2 compliance. MSFT targets currently
> claim SPC-2 compliance while they implement post SPC-2 features.
> With this patch we can correctly
13 matches
Mail list logo
