On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 22:28 -0700, Andrew Vasquez wrote: > On Fri, 08 Aug 2008, greg@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > On Aug 5, 6:52am, Andrew Vasquez wrote: > > } Subject: Re: Poisoning of Linux initiators on SCST reboot. > > > > Hi Andrew, thanks for the follow up. > > > > > > Any idea on how tough a backport to 2.6.26 or earlier would be? > > > > Running 'head-of-git' from Linus' tree would be somewhat of a stretch > > > > for production applications.... :-)( > > > > > > We are still looking to finalize a migration path. As it stands now, > > > the least invasive mechanism looks like backporting: > > > > > > [SCSI] qla2xxx: Add dev_loss_tmo_callbk/terminate_rport_io callback support. > > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=5f3a9a207f1fccde476dd31b4c63ead2967d934f > > > > > > [SCSI] qla2xxx: Set an rport's dev_loss_tmo value in a consistent manner. > > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=85821c906cf3563a00a3d98fa380a2581a7a5ff1 > > > > > > then adding this patch should suffice. We'll do some more testing > > > locally. > > > > I checked out the v2.6.26 tag into a branch and ported the patch > > series. Everything went in with minimal difficulties, I'm including > > a composite patch below > > > > The modules seem to build fine but I haven't had time to hitch them up > > to the harness to see whether they explode or not. Will let everyone > > know what we find. > > Ok, we've verified and backported the three changes through to 2.6.24. > The patches in this order: > > [SCSI] qla2xxx: Add dev_loss_tmo_callbk/terminate_rport_io callback support. > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=5f3a9a207f1fccde476dd31b4c63ead2967d934f > > [SCSI] qla2xxx: Set an rport's dev_loss_tmo value in a consistent manner. > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=85821c906cf3563a00a3d98fa380a2581a7a5ff1 > > [PATCH 2/8] qla2xxx: Correct synchronization of software/firmware fcport states. > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.scsi/43971 > > apply cleanly to 2.6.26 (git-am clean), and with minor 'fuzz' (git-am > warns) while applying the first patch against 2.6.25 and 2.6.24. > > James B., quick question, from what I recall of the 'stable' process, > I'll need to wait till the 3rd patch hits Linus' tree before I can > submit to stable@xxxxxxxxxxx Since I can't 'CC to stable' the first > two patches (they are already in Linus' tree), what's the best way to > accomidate this disjoint submission? Assuming they're OK to apply individually, you just send the first two to stable now quoting the upstream commit id and I'll add the CC: stable tag on the third which should cause it to sumbit automatically as soon as Linus pulls it. James -- 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
