Christophe Varoqui wrote: > Le mardi 19 juin 2007 à 14:25 -0700, Chandra Seetharaman a écrit : >> On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 23:15 +0200, Christophe Varoqui wrote: >>> Le lundi 18 juin 2007 à 17:57 -0700, Chandra Seetharaman a écrit : >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Sorry about the late response. I just realized that pp_rdac has been >>>> added to the multipath tree. >>>> >>>> pp_rdac is not needed to support lsi-rdac devices. pp_tpc performs >>>> equally good. I repeated my tests with pp_tpc and they did work well. >>>> >>> rdac has superseded the tpc checker in the upstream tree. >>> >> (A): >>> This checker is currently the only one usable with LSI Engenio hardware >>> integrated by either IBM or SGI. As such I don't plan on removing it >>> from the tree, if it's ok with you. >>> >> I am little confused here. >> >> Background info: >> ------ >> (1) When I said we do _not_ need pp_rdac, I am referring to path >> priority callout code(the code I submitted on May 21st). Code under the >> directory path_priority/pp_rdac. >> >> (2) The path checker code I submitted on March 23rd is needed to support >> the LSI Engenio hardware. This code resides in libcheckers/rdac.c >> ------ >> >> (2) is needed and I presume you are referring to that at (A) >> >> (1) is not needed and we can achieve the same with >> path_priority/pp_tpc/mpath_prio_tpc >> > > The confusion was on my side, thank you for pointing it. > I'll get back to my homework then. > Or we finally resolve this issue by renaming pp_tpc to pp_rdac. pp_tpc is sadly a misnomer as it was originally developed against SGI TPC arrays, of which I only had insufficient documentation. Only later I found out that this was actually a RDAC controller. Christophe, go. Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
