On Mon, Apr 02 2007, Mike Christie wrote: > Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 03 2007, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > >> From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Subject: Re: SMP pass through interface via bsg > >> Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 12:01:41 -0500 > >> > >>> On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 01:43 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > >>>> OK. I found another bug in smp_test tool (sends bogus response buffer > >>>> len to kernel). I've uploaded a new patch: > >>>> > >>>> http://zaal.org/bsg/smp-test2.diff > >>> That sort of works; you have a final bug in that the manufacturer info > >>> response frame is 64 bytes, not 128 bytes, but with that corrected > >>> everything goes through and I get the result back: > >>> > >>> hobholes:~# /home/jejb/git/sgv4-tools/smp_test /sys/class/bsg/expander-2\:0 > >>> SAS-1.1 format: 0 > >>> vendor identification: LSILOGIC > >>> product identification: SASx12 A.0 > >>> product revision level: > >>> > >>> So we can class this one as a success ... > >>> > >>> Thanks! > >> Great! Thanks. I'll try to finish the mpt driver's hook > >> sometime. Finally, We have a bsg user (though it also needs proper > >> bidi support). > >> > >> Jens, what remains to be done before bsg is merged into mainline? > > > > Well the bi-dir stuff and sg v4 design were the two bits that needed to > > get done before pushing bsg made sense, so we are getting there... > > Probably a 2.6.23 target, leaving the bidi bits a revision cycle to get > > sorted out. > > > > Could we get the bidi parts in without having to do the other sg clean > ups (my patches to merge the blk_rq_map* with the scsi ULD (sg, etc, > etc) equivalents or do the clean ups have to be done first? IMO the sg cleanups are an orthogonal effort. -- Jens Axboe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
