From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Linton Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: Allow 64-bit LUNs during report lun scan Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 16:44:26 -0600 Message-ID: <511D68CA.6050203@tributary.com> References: <1360767971-947-1-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> <511BEF0B.4020302@tributary.com> <1360813101.2502.8.camel@dabdike> <511D26B4.6070302@tributary.com> <94D0CD8314A33A4D9D801C0FE68B402950D58E9A@G9W0745.americas.hpqcorp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from relay.ihostexchange.net ([66.46.182.58]:54081 "EHLO relay.ihostexchange.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030238Ab3BNWo2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:44:28 -0500 In-Reply-To: <94D0CD8314A33A4D9D801C0FE68B402950D58E9A@G9W0745.americas.hpqcorp.net> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: "Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" Cc: James Bottomley , Hannes Reinecke , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2/14/2013 4:04 PM, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) wrote: > Like James notes, LUNs should generally be treated as opaque values. Maybe another issue to consider is how they are being displayed in userland. A device with two luns using one of the alternative lun addressing methods is going to get some pretty strange looking lun numbers showing up in userspace if they aren't decoded properly. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRHWjKAAoJEL5i86xrzcy7UuQH/RG5zp3/H5GoVDH+81M/dtHq RiHjCXuaHpESI6JGem8m7IrhFIRdEEuFL8OoJawMKLsxu6FD9Iwu0A9v99BNqLcc 1Jb+u/AVAhr4W5xB5Oua17IFwIVjxHipYvGDhbzfE/Fvy2lRJy5UDN1GXQMkVtI2 FSYVk3GI51LF2GKbtWtMYb0fTx1jvhlE3WMgeUOyjtNCK7wVOKOPCD8PJkMKC07f v50APFDLp2zCiVel1w3+QQLT96pcMFcfPalwMcfHjSHRxHyXgHlv5kZIk0pqiDxd GNvCc4Kalvc5BzDYw0j3s4+tzRUjtPEniJYO/jDC9MF507XlANVZgAILwu5PJbk= =35DZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----