QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

[tester7 A.]

Hi,

I am using Kernel 2.6.7 and I want to use the Large Block Device for the 
3.5TB Infortrend FC-Sata RAID.

My H/W is QLA2300, Infortrend A16F-G1A2 FC-SATA RAID, and a Intel Xeon SMP 
box.

I also turned on the "LBD support" in the kernel config.

But the kernel recognize only 1.5TB out of 3.5TB, even though it is one 
volume with 3.5TB.

qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Found an ISP2300, irq 27, iobase 0xf8c5c000
qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Configuring PCI space...
qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Configure NVRAM parameters...
qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Verifying loaded RISC code...
qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Waiting for LIP to complete...
qla2300 0000:03:09.0: LIP reset occured (f8f7).
qla2300 0000:03:09.0: LIP occured (f8f7).
qla2300 0000:03:09.0: LOOP UP detected (2 Gbps).
qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Topology - (Loop), Host Loop address 0x0
scsi3 : qla2xxx
qla2300 0000:03:09.0:
QLogic Fibre Channel HBA Driver: 8.00.00b12-k
  QLogic QLA2310 -
  ISP2300: PCI-X (66 MHz) @ 0000:03:09.0 hdma-, host#=3, fw=3.02.28 IPX
  Vendor: IFT       Model: A16F-G1A2         Rev: 334B
  Type:   Direct-Access                      ANSI SCSI revision: 03
qla2300 0000:03:09.0: scsi(3:0:0:0): Enabled tagged queuing, queue depth 32.
SCSI device sdc: 3022966784 512-byte hdwr sectors (1547759 MB)
SCSI device sdc: drive cache: write through
sdc: sdc1
Attached scsi disk sdc at scsi3, channel 0, id 0, lun 0

Do I need to do something about qla2300 driver or else, in order to make the 
kernel recognize 3.5TB?

Please help me. Any help will be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE 
download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/

RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

[tester7 A.]

LVM is not an option for  me, because I will not do volume management for 
this 3.5TB.

Thanks.


>From: "Guy" <bugzilla@watkins-home.com>
>To: "'tester7 A.'" <benew666@hotmail.com>
>Subject: RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:03:44 -0400
>
>I am not a driver god, so I don't know.  There may be a 2T limit that can't
>be crossed.  What about using LVM?
>
>Send your request back to the list.  Someone should answer, this seems like
>a real good question, or a bug!
>
>Guy
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: tester7 A. [mailto:benew666@hotmail.com]
>Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2004 8:43 PM
>To: bugzilla@watkins-home.com
>Subject: RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>
>Yes. if I split it, it works. But I do not want to use Software RAID0 for
>them.
>Is there any way to make the kernel recognize the whole volume?
>
>
> >From: "Guy" <bugzilla@watkins-home.com>
> >To: "'tester7 A.'" <benew666@hotmail.com>
> >Subject: RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
> >Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 12:04:05 -0400
> >
> >If you can split your ARRAY into 2 logical disks of 1.75TB each, it may
> >work.
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
> >[mailto:linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of tester7 A.
> >Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2004 4:43 AM
> >To: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> >Cc: tech@storageone.co.kr
> >Subject: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >I am using Kernel 2.6.7 and I want to use the Large Block Device for the
> >3.5TB Infortrend FC-Sata RAID.
> >
> >My H/W is QLA2300, Infortrend A16F-G1A2 FC-SATA RAID, and a Intel Xeon 
>SMP
> >box.
> >
> >I also turned on the "LBD support" in the kernel config.
> >
> >But the kernel recognize only 1.5TB out of 3.5TB, even though it is one
> >volume with 3.5TB.
> >
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Found an ISP2300, irq 27, iobase 0xf8c5c000
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Configuring PCI space...
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Configure NVRAM parameters...
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Verifying loaded RISC code...
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Waiting for LIP to complete...
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: LIP reset occured (f8f7).
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: LIP occured (f8f7).
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: LOOP UP detected (2 Gbps).
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Topology - (Loop), Host Loop address 0x0
> >scsi3 : qla2xxx
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0:
> >QLogic Fibre Channel HBA Driver: 8.00.00b12-k
> >   QLogic QLA2310 -
> >   ISP2300: PCI-X (66 MHz) @ 0000:03:09.0 hdma-, host#=3, fw=3.02.28 IPX
> >   Vendor: IFT       Model: A16F-G1A2         Rev: 334B
> >   Type:   Direct-Access                      ANSI SCSI revision: 03
> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: scsi(3:0:0:0): Enabled tagged queuing, queue depth
> >32.
> >SCSI device sdc: 3022966784 512-byte hdwr sectors (1547759 MB)
> >SCSI device sdc: drive cache: write through
> >sdc: sdc1
> >Attached scsi disk sdc at scsi3, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
> >
> >Do I need to do something about qla2300 driver or else, in order to make
> >the
> >
> >kernel recognize 3.5TB?
> >
> >Please help me. Any help will be appreciated.
> >
> >Thanks in advance.
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page - FREE
> >download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
> >
> >-
> >To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> >the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> >More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
> >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

[Frank Borich]

I have confirmed on 2.4.20 that the maximum size for a lun is 2 TB.  
Maybe a limitation of the driver's addressing scheme ? Has anyone
tried this with 2.6.x ?  It seems that for 2.4, LVM or MD driver
are your only options.

Frank Borich
------------------------------------------------------------------
Xyratex Inc.
Systems Engineer
Direct 630 654 6089
Fax 630 325 2513
e-mail frank_borich@us.xyratex.com
 

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-scsi-
>>owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of tester7 A.
>>Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2004 8:25 PM
>>To: bugzilla@watkins-home.com
>>Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
>>Subject: RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>>
>>LVM is not an option for  me, because I will not do volume management
for
>>this 3.5TB.
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>
>>>From: "Guy" <bugzilla@watkins-home.com>
>>>To: "'tester7 A.'" <benew666@hotmail.com>
>>>Subject: RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>>>Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:03:44 -0400
>>>
>>>I am not a driver god, so I don't know.  There may be a 2T limit that
>>can't
>>>be crossed.  What about using LVM?
>>>
>>>Send your request back to the list.  Someone should answer, this
seems
>>like
>>>a real good question, or a bug!
>>>
>>>Guy
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: tester7 A. [mailto:benew666@hotmail.com]
>>>Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2004 8:43 PM
>>>To: bugzilla@watkins-home.com
>>>Subject: RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>>>
>>>Yes. if I split it, it works. But I do not want to use Software RAID0
for
>>>them.
>>>Is there any way to make the kernel recognize the whole volume?
>>>
>>>
>>> >From: "Guy" <bugzilla@watkins-home.com>
>>> >To: "'tester7 A.'" <benew666@hotmail.com>
>>> >Subject: RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>>> >Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 12:04:05 -0400
>>> >
>>> >If you can split your ARRAY into 2 logical disks of 1.75TB each, it
may
>>> >work.
>>> >
>>> >-----Original Message-----
>>> >From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
>>> >[mailto:linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of tester7 A.
>>> >Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2004 4:43 AM
>>> >To: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
>>> >Cc: tech@storageone.co.kr
>>> >Subject: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>>> >
>>> >Hi,
>>> >
>>> >I am using Kernel 2.6.7 and I want to use the Large Block Device
for
>>the
>>> >3.5TB Infortrend FC-Sata RAID.
>>> >
>>> >My H/W is QLA2300, Infortrend A16F-G1A2 FC-SATA RAID, and a Intel
Xeon
>>>SMP
>>> >box.
>>> >
>>> >I also turned on the "LBD support" in the kernel config.
>>> >
>>> >But the kernel recognize only 1.5TB out of 3.5TB, even though it is
one
>>> >volume with 3.5TB.
>>> >
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Found an ISP2300, irq 27, iobase 0xf8c5c000
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Configuring PCI space...
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Configure NVRAM parameters...
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Verifying loaded RISC code...
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Waiting for LIP to complete...
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: LIP reset occured (f8f7).
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: LIP occured (f8f7).
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: LOOP UP detected (2 Gbps).
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: Topology - (Loop), Host Loop address 0x0
>>> >scsi3 : qla2xxx
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0:
>>> >QLogic Fibre Channel HBA Driver: 8.00.00b12-k
>>> >   QLogic QLA2310 -
>>> >   ISP2300: PCI-X (66 MHz) @ 0000:03:09.0 hdma-, host#=3,
fw=3.02.28
>>IPX
>>> >   Vendor: IFT       Model: A16F-G1A2         Rev: 334B
>>> >   Type:   Direct-Access                      ANSI SCSI revision:
03
>>> >qla2300 0000:03:09.0: scsi(3:0:0:0): Enabled tagged queuing, queue
>>depth
>>> >32.
>>> >SCSI device sdc: 3022966784 512-byte hdwr sectors (1547759 MB)
>>> >SCSI device sdc: drive cache: write through
>>> >sdc: sdc1
>>> >Attached scsi disk sdc at scsi3, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
>>> >
>>> >Do I need to do something about qla2300 driver or else, in order to
>>make
>>> >the
>>> >
>>> >kernel recognize 3.5TB?
>>> >
>>> >Please help me. Any help will be appreciated.
>>> >
>>> >Thanks in advance.
>>> >
>>> >_________________________________________________________________
>>> >MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page
-
>>FREE
>>> >download!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
>>> >
>>> >-
>>> >To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
linux-scsi"
>>in
>>> >the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> >More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>_________________________________________________________________
>>>STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
>>>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>>>
>>>
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
>>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>>
>>-
>>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi"
in
>>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

[James Bottomley]

On Sun, 2004-06-20 at 03:43, tester7 A. wrote:
> SCSI device sdc: 3022966784 512-byte hdwr sectors (1547759 MB)
> SCSI device sdc: drive cache: write through
> sdc: sdc1
> Attached scsi disk sdc at scsi3, channel 0, id 0, lun 0

The drive itself replied with that capacity, which is incorrect.  It's
supposed to reply with the largest possible capacity (0xffffffff) and we
use that as a signal to retry with READ_CAPACITY_16.

Could you contact the support line of the array and make sure of two
things:

1) It does actually support single LUNs with a capacity of >2TB (lots of
arrays don't)
2) And if 1) is true, why is it not responding correctly to the READ
CAPACITY(10)? The spec (spc-2 Rev 8, 5.2.11) says "If the number of
logical blocks exceeds the maximum value[...]the device server shall
transfer FFFFFFFFh in the RETURNED LOGICAL BLOCK ADDRESS field"

James

RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

[Frank Borich]

Is this true of both 2.4 and 2.6 ?

Frank Borich
------------------------------------------------------------------
Xyratex Inc.
Systems Engineer
Direct 630 654 6089
Fax 630 325 2513
e-mail frank_borich@us.xyratex.com
 

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-scsi-
>>owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of James Bottomley
>>Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 9:10 AM
>>To: tester7 A.
>>Cc: SCSI Mailing List; tech@storageone.co.kr
>>Subject: Re: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>>
>>On Sun, 2004-06-20 at 03:43, tester7 A. wrote:
>>> SCSI device sdc: 3022966784 512-byte hdwr sectors (1547759 MB)
>>> SCSI device sdc: drive cache: write through
>>> sdc: sdc1
>>> Attached scsi disk sdc at scsi3, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
>>
>>The drive itself replied with that capacity, which is incorrect.  It's
>>supposed to reply with the largest possible capacity (0xffffffff) and
we
>>use that as a signal to retry with READ_CAPACITY_16.
>>
>>Could you contact the support line of the array and make sure of two
>>things:
>>
>>1) It does actually support single LUNs with a capacity of >2TB (lots
of
>>arrays don't)
>>2) And if 1) is true, why is it not responding correctly to the READ
>>CAPACITY(10)? The spec (spc-2 Rev 8, 5.2.11) says "If the number of
>>logical blocks exceeds the maximum value[...]the device server shall
>>transfer FFFFFFFFh in the RETURNED LOGICAL BLOCK ADDRESS field"
>>
>>James
>>
>>
>>-
>>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi"
in
>>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

[James Bottomley]

On Mon, 2004-06-21 at 09:28, Frank Borich wrote:
> Is this true of both 2.4 and 2.6 ?

No, only 2.6 has the correct LBD support.

James

Re: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

[tester7 A.]

I have sent the those 2 questions to the Infortrend. When I get the answer, 
I will get back to you.

Thank you very much.



>From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
>To: "tester7 A." <benew666@hotmail.com>
>CC: SCSI Mailing List <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, tech@storageone.co.kr
>Subject: Re: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>Date: 21 Jun 2004 09:09:44 -0500
>
>On Sun, 2004-06-20 at 03:43, tester7 A. wrote:
> > SCSI device sdc: 3022966784 512-byte hdwr sectors (1547759 MB)
> > SCSI device sdc: drive cache: write through
> > sdc: sdc1
> > Attached scsi disk sdc at scsi3, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
>
>The drive itself replied with that capacity, which is incorrect.  It's
>supposed to reply with the largest possible capacity (0xffffffff) and we
>use that as a signal to retry with READ_CAPACITY_16.
>
>Could you contact the support line of the array and make sure of two
>things:
>
>1) It does actually support single LUNs with a capacity of >2TB (lots of
>arrays don't)
>2) And if 1) is true, why is it not responding correctly to the READ
>CAPACITY(10)? The spec (spc-2 Rev 8, 5.2.11) says "If the number of
>logical blocks exceeds the maximum value[...]the device server shall
>transfer FFFFFFFFh in the RETURNED LOGICAL BLOCK ADDRESS field"
>
>James
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

[Frank Borich]

Looking at an FC trace on an Infortrend controller I have, shows that
for a LUN 3586680 MB in size, the LBA is B5D3BFFF in the "RETURNED
LOGICAL BLOCK ADDRESS FIELD" 
and with in the "BLOCK LENGTH IN BYTES FIELD" field is 200h , ( B5D3BFFF
* 200h =  approx. 1.6 TB). Seems that infortrend does NOT respond
properly to READ_CAPACITY_10, at least in my case. 
James, this may be a dumb question, please excuse my ignorance of the
internals of the scsi subsystem, 
but is there a plan to implement LBD support in the 2.4 tree ?

Frank Borich
------------------------------------------------------------------
Xyratex Inc.
Systems Engineer
Direct 630 654 6089
Fax 630 325 2513
e-mail frank_borich@us.xyratex.com
 
 

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org 
>>[mailto:linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of tester7 A.
>>Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 7:32 PM
>>To: James.Bottomley@steeleye.com
>>Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; tech@storageone.co.kr
>>Subject: Re: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>>
>>I have sent the those 2 questions to the Infortrend. When I 
>>get the answer, I will get back to you.
>>
>>Thank you very much.
>>
>>
>>
>>>From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
>>>To: "tester7 A." <benew666@hotmail.com>
>>>CC: SCSI Mailing List <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, 
>>>tech@storageone.co.kr
>>>Subject: Re: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>>>Date: 21 Jun 2004 09:09:44 -0500
>>>
>>>On Sun, 2004-06-20 at 03:43, tester7 A. wrote:
>>> > SCSI device sdc: 3022966784 512-byte hdwr sectors 
>>(1547759 MB) SCSI 
>>> > device sdc: drive cache: write through
>>> > sdc: sdc1
>>> > Attached scsi disk sdc at scsi3, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
>>>
>>>The drive itself replied with that capacity, which is 
>>incorrect.  It's 
>>>supposed to reply with the largest possible capacity 
>>(0xffffffff) and 
>>>we use that as a signal to retry with READ_CAPACITY_16.
>>>
>>>Could you contact the support line of the array and make sure of two
>>>things:
>>>
>>>1) It does actually support single LUNs with a capacity of 
>>>2TB (lots 
>>>of arrays don't)
>>>2) And if 1) is true, why is it not responding correctly to the READ 
>>>CAPACITY(10)? The spec (spc-2 Rev 8, 5.2.11) says "If the number of 
>>>logical blocks exceeds the maximum value[...]the device server shall 
>>>transfer FFFFFFFFh in the RETURNED LOGICAL BLOCK ADDRESS field"
>>>
>>>James
>>>
>>>
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. 
>>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
>>
>>-
>>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe 
>>linux-scsi" in the body of a message to 
>>majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at  
>>http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>>

RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

[James Bottomley]

On Wed, 2004-07-28 at 09:46, Frank Borich wrote:
> Looking at an FC trace on an Infortrend controller I have, shows that
> for a LUN 3586680 MB in size, the LBA is B5D3BFFF in the "RETURNED
> LOGICAL BLOCK ADDRESS FIELD" 
> and with in the "BLOCK LENGTH IN BYTES FIELD" field is 200h , ( B5D3BFFF
> * 200h =  approx. 1.6 TB). Seems that infortrend does NOT respond
> properly to READ_CAPACITY_10, at least in my case. 

Well 3586680 MB == 0x1b5d3bfff * 0x200

so I think you can see where the returned figure is coming from...

Infortrends should be made aware of the problem so they can do a bios
upgrade.  I suspect that even if the array returned the correct capacity
it would be unable to process the READ/WRITE(16) commands necessary to
reach it anyway, so their "fix" may be to tell you that no individual
luns can be configured beyond 2TB.

> James, this may be a dumb question, please excuse my ignorance of the
> internals of the scsi subsystem, 
> but is there a plan to implement LBD support in the 2.4 tree ?

The problem is not just in SCSI, it permeates the block layer.  I don't
think there's much point backporting LBD to 2.4, although many vendor
trees have it.

James

RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?

[Frank Borich]

James,You guessed right, I sent a read capacity 16 cdb to the controller
and recieved a 
check condition back: sense 05 illegal request and additional qualifiers
2000 = invalid 
command operation. Seems as though controller was not architected to
support luns greater
than 2 .1 TB. The size of any lun > than 2 .1 TB will be set as a modulo
2.1 TB
 
-Frank

Frank Borich
------------------------------------------------------------------
Xyratex Inc.
Systems Engineer
Direct 630 654 6089
Fax 630 325 2513
e-mail frank_borich@us.xyratex.com
 
 

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: James Bottomley [mailto:James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com] 
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 9:18 AM
>>To: Frank Borich
>>Cc: tester7 A.; SCSI Mailing List; tech@storageone.co.kr
>>Subject: RE: QLA2300, Infortrand and LBD?
>>
>>On Wed, 2004-07-28 at 09:46, Frank Borich wrote:
>>> Looking at an FC trace on an Infortrend controller I have, 
>>shows that 
>>> for a LUN 3586680 MB in size, the LBA is B5D3BFFF in the "RETURNED 
>>> LOGICAL BLOCK ADDRESS FIELD"
>>> and with in the "BLOCK LENGTH IN BYTES FIELD" field is 200h , ( 
>>> B5D3BFFF
>>> * 200h =  approx. 1.6 TB). Seems that infortrend does NOT respond 
>>> properly to READ_CAPACITY_10, at least in my case.
>>
>>Well 3586680 MB == 0x1b5d3bfff * 0x200
>>
>>so I think you can see where the returned figure is coming from...
>>
>>Infortrends should be made aware of the problem so they can 
>>do a bios upgrade.  I suspect that even if the array returned 
>>the correct capacity it would be unable to process the 
>>READ/WRITE(16) commands necessary to reach it anyway, so 
>>their "fix" may be to tell you that no individual luns can be 
>>configured beyond 2TB.
>>
>>> James, this may be a dumb question, please excuse my 
>>ignorance of the 
>>> internals of the scsi subsystem, but is there a plan to 
>>implement LBD 
>>> support in the 2.4 tree ?
>>
>>The problem is not just in SCSI, it permeates the block 
>>layer.  I don't think there's much point backporting LBD to 
>>2.4, although many vendor trees have it.
>>
>>James
>>
>>
>>
>>