[PATCH V3 00/24] aacraid: Patchset for Smart Family Support

This patchset adds support to the HBA1000 and SMARTIOC2000 family of cards. The driver version is now updated to 50740 Changes in V2: Fixed kbuild test robot warnings Changes in V3: Removed Camel case definitions Misc fixes Raghava Aditya Renukunta (24): [SCSI] aacraid: Remove duplicate irq

[PATCH V3 21/24] aacraid: Retrieve HBA host information ioctl

Added a new ioctl interface to retrieve the host device information. Signed-off-by: Raghava Aditya Renukunta Signed-off-by: Dave Carroll --- Changes in V2: None Changes in V3: None drivers/scsi/aacraid/aacraid.h | 52

Re: [PATCH 05/18] block: allow specifying size for extra command data

On 01/27/2017 10:30 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 10:26 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 01/27/2017 10:21 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>> On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 17:12 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:15:55PM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote: >

Re: split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On 01/27/2017 09:34 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:27:02AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> Feel free to repost it, I have no problem rebasing that branch as it's >> standalone for now. > > Ok, I'll repost what I have right now, which is on top of a merge > of your

Re: [PATCH 05/18] block: allow specifying size for extra command data

On 01/27/2017 10:21 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 17:12 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:15:55PM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote: >>> +static void *alloc_request_size(gfp_t gfp_mask, void *data) >>> >>> I like alloc_request_simple() but

Re: [dm-devel] split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 01:04 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > The previous patch had a bug if you didn't use a scheduler, here's a > version that should work fine in both cases. I've also updated the > above mentioned branch, so feel free to pull that as well and merge to > master like before. Booting

Re: [dm-devel] split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On 01/27/2017 09:52 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 01:04 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> The previous patch had a bug if you didn't use a scheduler, here's a >> version that should work fine in both cases. I've also updated the >> above mentioned branch, so feel free to pull that

Re: [dm-devel] split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 18:22 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > What's your boot device? I've been booting this on a variety of setups, > no problems observed. It's booting my laptop, and on SCSI and SATA as > well. What is your root drive? What is the queue depth of it? > Controller? The boot device in

Re: split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:38:40AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > > Ok, I'll repost what I have right now, which is on top of a merge > > of your block/for-4.11/next and your for-next from this morning > > my time. > > Perfect. At least I tried, looks like the mail server is overloaded and crapped

Re: [PATCH 07/18] dm: always defer request allocation to the owner of the request_queue

On Fri, Jan 27 2017 at 11:36am -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:34:34AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > Noticed after further review that it seems a bit weird to have the non > > blk-mq support in drivers calling blk_mq_rq_to_pdu(). But I'm not sure > > a

Re: split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:21:46AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 01/27/2017 09:17 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:11:14AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > >> I've queued this up for 4.11. Since some of the patches had dependencies > >> on changes in master since

Re: split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On 01/27/2017 09:17 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:11:14AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> I've queued this up for 4.11. Since some of the patches had dependencies >> on changes in master since for-4.11/block was forked, they are sitting >> in a separate branch that has both

Re: [PATCH 07/18] dm: always defer request allocation to the owner of the request_queue

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:34:34AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote: > Noticed after further review that it seems a bit weird to have the non > blk-mq support in drivers calling blk_mq_rq_to_pdu(). But I'm not sure > a blk_rq_to_pdu() macro to blk_mq_rq_to_pdu() is the right thing. What > do you guys

Re: [PATCH 07/18] dm: always defer request allocation to the owner of the request_queue

On Wed, Jan 25 2017 at 12:25pm -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > DM already calls blk_mq_alloc_request on the request_queue of the > underlying device if it is a blk-mq device. But now that we allow drivers > to allocate additional data and initialize it ahead of time we need to do

Re: split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:27:02AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > Feel free to repost it, I have no problem rebasing that branch as it's > standalone for now. Ok, I'll repost what I have right now, which is on top of a merge of your block/for-4.11/next and your for-next from this morning my time.

[PATCH 01/19] block: add a op_is_flush helper

This centralizes the checks for bios that needs to be go into the flush state machine. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche Reviewed-by: Martin K. Petersen --- block/blk-core.c | 8

split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V3

Hi all, this series splits the support for SCSI passthrough commands from the main struct request used all over the block layer into a separate scsi_request structure that drivers that want to support SCSI passthough need to embedded as the first thing into their request-private data, similar to

[PATCH 02/19] md: cleanup bio op / flags handling in raid1_write_request

No need for the local variables, the bio is still live and we can just assign the bits we want directly. Make me wonder why we can't assign all the bio flags to start with. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche Reviewed-by:

Re: split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On 01/27/2017 09:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:21:46AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 01/27/2017 09:17 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:11:14AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: I've queued this up for 4.11. Since some of the patches had

Re: split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:11:14AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > I've queued this up for 4.11. Since some of the patches had dependencies > on changes in master since for-4.11/block was forked, they are sitting > in a separate branch that has both for-4.11/block and v4.10-rc5 pulled > in first.

Re: [PATCH 05/18] block: allow specifying size for extra command data

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:15:55PM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > +static void *alloc_request_size(gfp_t gfp_mask, void *data) > > I like alloc_request_simple() but alloc_request_size() seems a bit > contrived. _reserve? _extra? _special? Don't have any good suggestions, > I'm afraid. Not

Re: split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On Wed, Jan 25 2017, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Hi all, > > this series splits the support for SCSI passthrough commands from the > main struct request used all over the block layer into a separate > scsi_request structure that drivers that want to support SCSI passthough > need to embedded as

RE: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: scsi_transport_fc: Provide a lightweight option for Virtual FC Hosts.

> -Original Message- > From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:h...@infradead.org] > Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 7:12 AM > To: Cathy Avery > Cc: KY Srinivasan ; Haiyang Zhang > ; j...@linux.vnet.ibm.com; >

Re: [PATCH] scsi: srp_transport: Fix 'always false comparison' in srp_tmo_valid()

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > This patch is wrong. The purpose of the dev_loss_tmo >= LONG_MAX / HZ check > is to avoid that the expression 1UL * dev_loss_tmo * HZ further down > overflows. Can you check whether changing the if-statement

Re: [dm-devel] split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

On 01/26/2017 11:40 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 01/26/2017 06:22 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 01/26/2017 06:15 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>> On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 17:41 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: On 01/26/2017 05:38 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > I see similar behavior with the blk-mq-sched

Re: [PATCH V2 05/24] aacraid: Retrieve and update the device types

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 09:00:42PM +, Raghava Aditya Renukunta wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: linux-scsi-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-scsi- > > ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Raghava Aditya Renukunta > > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 10:44 AM > > To: