From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
thlin@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
miltonm@bga.com, Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ipr: Fix HDIO_GET_IDENTITY oops for SATA devices
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 12:57:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1212429428.3369.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4844312C.7010403@garzik.org>
On Mon, 2008-06-02 at 13:43 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> James Bottomley wrote:
> > The problems seem to come at us from the 1:1 relationship between a
> > 'port' and a host in libata. Is there no way we can perhaps recast what
> > we think of as a phy as what libata thinks of as a link and thus keep us
> > at one host per actual physical device?
>
>
> It's difficult to do that universally, but OTOH it would be quite
> reasonable to do that for modern SATA controllers, leaving the older
> master/slave controllers as one-host-per-port.
>
> I've been wanting to do that for a while, even.
>
> The main thing holding me back is not any technical issue, but desire to
> avoid breakage caused by abrupt topology change.
Actually, that's not quite what I was suggesting, but actually it would
be better since then the ata topology will map easily into what sas
wants.
The quickest way seems to be to break the scsi_host <-> ata_port link by
mapping scsi_host <-> ata_host instead. Legacy controllers with only a
single port can keep the apparent 1:1 mapping (we can even keep the
hostdata stuff). Unfortunately, the standard way of doing this is via
the transport classes, but as long as you have a pointer from the port
to the host and from the device to the port (which you do) it should be
possible.
The downside I can see is that qc_defer handling changes non trivially
because of this, but there don't seem to be many other issues.
The ideal (for us at least) would be to completely separate port
operations from host operations, because libsas really wants to control
the host and attach the port only to SATA devices.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-02 17:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <12124164141515-patch-mail.ibm.com>
2008-06-02 16:08 ` [PATCH 1/1] ipr: Fix HDIO_GET_IDENTITY oops for SATA devices Jeff Garzik
2008-06-02 16:27 ` Brian King
2008-06-02 16:45 ` James Bottomley
2008-06-02 17:43 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-06-02 17:57 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2008-06-02 18:11 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-06-02 18:51 ` Brian King
2008-06-02 18:54 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-06-02 19:39 ` James Bottomley
2008-06-02 20:27 ` Brian King
2008-06-02 19:35 ` James Bottomley
2008-06-02 19:53 ` Alan Cox
2008-06-02 14:20 Brian King
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-06-02 14:20 Brian King
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=1212429428.3369.45.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miltonm@bga.com \
--cc=thlin@linux.vnet.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).