> -----Original Message----- > From: James Bottomley [mailto:James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 11:25 AM > To: Ian Abbott > Cc: linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Andy > Whitcroft; KY Srinivasan; Haiyang Zhang; Tim Gardner > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: hyper-v storvsc switch up to SPC-3 > > On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 19:18 +0100, Ian Abbott wrote: > > On 2014-05-16 18:58, James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 18:39 +0100, Ian Abbott wrote: > > >> On 2014-05-16 18:14, James Bottomley wrote: > > >>> On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 16:39 +0100, Ian Abbott wrote: > > >>>> From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > >>>> > > >>>> Suggested-by: James Bottomley > > >>>> <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > >>> > > >>> That is my patch, isn't it, just with a slightly modified comment: > > >>> > > >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=137908428211951 > > >> > > >> I believe so, yes. Looking at Ubuntu's kernel repository, Andy > > >> reverted his original 4 patches and applied your patch instead. > > >> I'm not sure about the other patch (PATCH 2/2) that disables the > > >> MAINTENANCE_IN command. Perhaps that was needed as a > consequence > > >> of claiming to be SCSI level SPC-3? > > > > > > Yes, see other email. > > > > > >>> Andy promised to go off and test it and that's where the thread > > >>> ended. I take it the results of the testing was positive? I was > > >>> expecting him to report back on that so KY could ack the patch. > > >>> > > >>> James > > >> > > >> The patch seems to be in Ubuntu Saucy's 3.11 kernel version > > >> 3.11.0-12.18 onwards - see > > >> http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/ubuntu-saucy.git;a=log;h=refs > > >> /tags/Ubuntu-3.11.0-12.18 > > >> for the logs. > > >> > > >> Would you like me to resubmit the patch with you as the author? > > >> There isn't a "Signed-off-by:" line for you on this patch at the > > >> moment. Is it okay for me to add one? > > > > > > I'm not really comfortable with the way these patches are being > > > submitted. I really need Andy to justify what's been done and why, > > > then find an upstream acceptable format then for the Microsoft > > > Hyper-V guys to ack them. We need more information than you can > > > infer simply from the patches being in Ubuntu. If Andy's off > > > somewhere, we can wait because this is just simply feature > > > enablement; the bug doesn't show unless you enable trim on hv storvsc. > > > > TBH, I'm out of my depth on this, but hopefully I've kicked up the > > dust a bit, since the patches (good or bad) have been languishing in > > Ubuntu's repositories since October! > > That's OK, thanks for doing this; I'd forgotten about the patch. Sorry to be jumping in late on this discussion. If I remember correctly, the patch Ubuntu has been carrying I think is the original patch from Andy that James did not like. Checking with the Windows guys, they are not comfortable declaring compliance with SPC_3 when no testing has been done to verify this compliance. Hopefully, soon our host will be SPC_3 compliant and we will not need Andy's (original patch). Regards, K. Y -- 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
