The problem is easy to duplicate using sg_persist to register/reserve paths to a Clariion array and then fail the active path. The "enable" path will fail to become active when the HONOR RESERVATION flag is not set. Given of course that you have a Clariion array handy... One question I have asked EMC is in what situations would you NOT want to set this bit? I can test out any changes you make in my test rig and I can probably get the folks in the EMC lab I work with to test it as well. Eddie On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 12:45 -0700, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > Yes, Mike Christie and I were aware of this and it was one of the issue > we were trying to resolve before we pushed scsi_dh interface upstream. > (It is little complicated as we need the parameters to be set per > vendor-product tuple). > > The original code I ported to scsi_dh interface was from Ed Goggin(who > was working for EMC then). IIRC, he was also aware of this issue. > > When we pushed scsi_dh interface, we did get few of the EMC folks (on > Cc) to review/test the code and they did, and this issue was not seen as > a problem. > > We wanted to get back to that issue sometime later, got busy with other > things, and it disappeared from my list of things-to-do as the > regression was not seen as an issue (till now :)... I will get back to > it. > > chandra > > On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 14:10 -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 13:14 -0400, Eddie Williams wrote: > > > I notice in scsi_dh_emc.c that there is a comment: > > > > > > TODO: need some interface so we can set trespass values > > > > > > I don't see where any such interface has been developed or even any > > > discussion on the different mailing lists to create such an interface. > > > Did I miss something? > > > > > > As it stands now there is no way that I can see to have the emc hardware > > > handler support the "honor trespass" feature short of recompiling the > > > module forcing the flag to be set. This leaves a feature that worked in > > > earlier versions of multipath not working now. > > > > OK so as I understand it that means that the line > > > > hardware handler "1 emc 0 1" > > > > now fails to function correctly because dm-emc no longer exists. That > > makes this a functionality regression from 2.6.26 because of this > > commit: > > > > > > commit cb520223d7f22c5386aff27a5856a66e2c32aaac > > Author: Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Thu May 1 14:50:34 2008 -0700 > > > > [SCSI] scsi_dh: Remove hardware handlers from dm > > > > This patch removes the 3 hardware handlers that currently exist > > under dm as the functionality is moved to SCSI layer in the earlier > > patches. > > > > Because we haven't actually moved all the functionality. > > > > James > > > > > > > > -- > dm-devel mailing list > dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
