Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2011-01-01 Thread Mike Christie
On 12/30/2010 02:16 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: Mike Christie wrote: It looks like sg_map cheats and does not look at sysfs for this. Will do one or the other. It looks like some sg_map26 commands are broken with your kernel config too now (sg_map26 uses sysfs where sg_map does not). yes, sg_map26

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2011-01-01 Thread Or Gerlitz
Mike Christie wrote: I do not know. We do not do it in Fedora either. okay, so I guess we'll leave it for that time being... Or. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups open-iscsi group. To post to this group, send email to open-is...@googlegroups.com. To

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-30 Thread Or Gerlitz
Mike Christie wrote: It looks like sg_map cheats and does not look at sysfs for this. Will do one or the other. It looks like some sg_map26 commands are broken with your kernel config too now (sg_map26 uses sysfs where sg_map does not). yes, sg_map26 is very much broken indeed on my kernel...

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-27 Thread Or Gerlitz
Mike Christie wrote: Or Gerlitz wrote: I think you said at some point this may happen if I use old udev bits, what version of udev you're using? 147. I do not have any udev wait_for_sysfs: waiting messages in my log so it looks like a udev issue. yep, using that udev version eliminated

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-27 Thread Mike Christie
On 12/27/2010 04:20 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: Mike Christie wrote: Or Gerlitz wrote: I think you said at some point this may happen if I use old udev bits, what version of udev you're using? 147. I do not have any udev wait_for_sysfs: waiting messages in my log so it looks like a udev issue.

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-27 Thread Mike Christie
On 12/27/2010 07:09 PM, Mike Christie wrote: On 12/27/2010 04:20 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: Mike Christie wrote: Or Gerlitz wrote: I think you said at some point this may happen if I use old udev bits, what version of udev you're using? 147. I do not have any udev wait_for_sysfs: waiting

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-26 Thread Mike Christie
On 12/23/2010 02:05 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote: [...] you can see that the kernel scsi code detected the new scsi host (98) / lun on it and assigned the sdd device for that lun, but I can tell that this all happens only @ 16:07:18 which is seven seconds --after-- the lun was detected @ 16:07:11 If

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-23 Thread Or Gerlitz
Mike Christie wrote: Do you mean the /dev/sdX's getting created or the kernel scsi scanning code detecting luns? I did not see either. Mike, from this log you can see that the kernel scsi code detected the new scsi host (98) / lun on it and assigned the sdd device for that lun, but I can

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-23 Thread Or Gerlitz
[...] you can see that the kernel scsi code detected the new scsi host (98) / lun on it and assigned the sdd device for that lun, but I can tell that this all happens only @ 16:07:18 which is seven seconds --after-- the lun was detected @ 16:07:11 If we both use the same .config is there

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-20 Thread Mike Christie
On 12/19/2010 06:38 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: Mike Christie wrote: [...] I think in general the iscsi tools are using sysfs incorrectly. I think I need to use the sysfs code udev is using. Again, I'm more not less (...) worried from the original problem of the luns appearing with delay on the

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-19 Thread Or Gerlitz
Mike Christie wrote: [...] I think in general the iscsi tools are using sysfs incorrectly. I think I need to use the sysfs code udev is using. Again, I'm more not less (...) worried from the original problem of the luns appearing with delay on the initiator node, I wonder if anyone else was

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-16 Thread Mike Christie
On 12/16/2010 01:24 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: can it explain the delay in exposing the luns to the initiator scsi stack? Not sure what you mean exactly. The initiator will do iscsi login then scan for devices by doing echo - - - /sys/class/scsi_host/hostX/scan. The scsi layer handles this by

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-16 Thread Mike Christie
On 12/15/2010 03:21 PM, Mike Christie wrote: # iscsiadm -m session -P 3 The iscsiadm -m session output does not rely on udev or anything that udev creates like the /dev nodes. iscsiadm just reads sysfs. The missing output could be due to a change in the sysfs layout again. Could you send me

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-16 Thread Mike Christie
On 12/16/2010 07:01 PM, Mike Christie wrote: On 12/15/2010 03:21 PM, Mike Christie wrote: # iscsiadm -m session -P 3 The iscsiadm -m session output does not rely on udev or anything that udev creates like the /dev nodes. iscsiadm just reads sysfs. The missing output could be due to a change

udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-15 Thread Or Gerlitz
Hi Mike, With kernel 2.6.37-rc5 (the latest upstream release) I see some udev related issue, when doing login (I'm using iscsi-initiator-utils-6.2.0.871-0.16.el5), the following appears in the system logs udevd-event[12383]: wait_for_sysfs: waiting for

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-15 Thread Mike Christie
On 12/15/2010 08:47 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: Hi Mike, With kernel 2.6.37-rc5 (the latest upstream release) I see some udev related issue, when doing login (I'm using iscsi-initiator-utils-6.2.0.871-0.16.el5), the following appears in the system logs udevd-event[12383]: wait_for_sysfs: waiting

Re: udev related issue with latest upstream bits

2010-12-15 Thread Or Gerlitz
Mike Christie wrote: Could you send me your kernel .config? Yes I do The other udev messages could also be caused by a older udev and a sysfs change can it explain the delay in exposing the luns to the initiator scsi stack? Or. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to