Re: QUEUE_FLAG_CLUSTER?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>>>>> "Ed" == "Ed Lin <- PTU" <ed.lin@xxxxxxxxxxx>> writes:

Ed,

Ed> The dm already has function to adjust limits based on underlying
Ed> device limits. So, is it good to add the no_cluster setting to the
Ed> queue limits at the scsi side? For example, some code change like
Ed> the following?

We should never issue a command that does not adhere to the limits set
by the device driver. Upon inspection I agree this is busted and it's my
fault.

DM does not have a request_queue when stacking and as a result we ended
up with two entities tracking whether a device supports clustering or
not. And as it turns out the queue flag and the queue limits are not
always in agreement.

I've coded up a proper fix for this and will post a patch shortly. I'm
just running a bunch of tests to ensure we do the right thing...

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering

--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel


[Index of Archives]     [DM Crypt]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux