From: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
To: Jeremy Higdon <jeremy@classic.engr.sgi.com>
Cc: Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@redhat.com>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH + RFC] Beginning of some updates to scsi mid layer
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 03:37:04 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020628033704.B23044@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10206272241.ZM1032399@classic.engr.sgi.com>; from jeremy@classic.engr.sgi.com on Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 10:41:31PM -0700
On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 10:41:31PM -0700, Jeremy Higdon wrote:
> Is there any accounting for the following condition:
>
> An array with multiple logical units can accept 256 commands (for
> argument purposes) from all initiators for all luns. Therefore,
> the number of commands that you can queue to sdX is dependent
> on how many commands queued by this initiator to other sds, as well
> as how many commands other initiators have issued to this sd and
> others.
That's (currently) on a per driver basis. My driver would account for
this situation just fine. Others might not. That is one of the things I
plan to change in the mid layer very soon now.
> This may not be an issue so much with parallel SCSI RAIDs, but it does
> come up with Fibrechannel.
>
> It is theoretically possible to get QUEUE_FULL when the host has no other
> commands in progress on a logical unit. Would the host driver then believe
> that it could issue 0 or 1 command only, or is there some lower limit?
>
> jeremy
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com> 919-754-3700 x44233
Red Hat, Inc.
1801 Varsity Dr.
Raleigh, NC 27606
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-28 7:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20020619014048.B8623@redhat.com>
2002-06-19 17:44 ` [PATCH + RFC] Beginning of some updates to scsi mid layer Pete Zaitcev
2002-06-19 17:55 ` Matthew Jacob
2002-06-19 18:25 ` Doug Ledford
2002-06-28 5:41 ` Jeremy Higdon
2002-06-28 7:37 ` Doug Ledford [this message]
2002-06-28 8:25 Martin Peschke3
2002-06-28 11:22 ` Doug Ledford
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-06-28 6:08 Martin Peschke3
2002-06-28 7:39 ` Doug Ledford
2002-06-29 1:19 ` Jeremy Higdon
2002-06-29 2:04 ` Matthew Jacob
2002-06-29 10:05 ` Doug Ledford
2002-06-29 10:37 ` Matthew Jacob
2002-07-01 21:02 ` Gérard Roudier
2002-07-01 19:08 ` Matthew Jacob
2002-07-01 19:15 ` Doug Ledford
2002-07-01 19:23 ` Matthew Jacob
2002-07-01 19:59 ` Doug Ledford
2002-07-01 20:17 ` Matthew Jacob
2002-07-02 11:27 ` Rogier Wolff
2002-06-29 10:10 ` Doug Ledford
2002-06-19 0:47 Doug Ledford
2002-06-19 21:15 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-06-20 19:45 ` Doug Ledford
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020628033704.B23044@redhat.com \
--to=dledford@redhat.com \
--cc=jeremy@classic.engr.sgi.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zaitcev@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.