Request to add EMC Invista to the v2.6.x SCSI Blacklist...

Request to add EMC Invista to the v2.6.x SCSI Blacklist...

[conway, heather]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 274 bytes --]

Hi,
I'd like to request that the enclosed patch to scsi_devinfo.c be considered
for inclusion in the v2.6.x kernel.  This would add support for sparse LUNs
and large LUNs for the EMC Invista product.  
Thanks for your consideration.
Heather
 <<scsi_devinfo_invista.patch>> 

[-- Attachment #2: scsi_devinfo_invista.patch --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 652 bytes --]

--- scsi_devinfo.c	2005-07-06 14:55:11.892645608 -0400
+++ /root/scsi_devinfo.c	2005-07-06 14:54:57.558824680 -0400
@@ -136,6 +136,7 @@
 	{"DELL", "PERCRAID", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN},
 	{"DGC", "RAID", NULL, BLIST_SPARSELUN},	/* Dell PV 650F, storage on LUN 0 */
 	{"DGC", "DISK", NULL, BLIST_SPARSELUN},	/* Dell PV 650F, no storage on LUN 0 */
+	{"EMC", "Invista", NULL, BLIST_SPARSELUN | BLIST_LARGELUN}, /*Invista, no storage on LUN 0 */
 	{"EMC", "SYMMETRIX", NULL, BLIST_SPARSELUN | BLIST_LARGELUN | BLIST_FORCELUN},
 	{"EMULEX", "MD21/S2     ESDI", NULL, BLIST_SINGLELUN},
 	{"FSC", "CentricStor", "*", BLIST_SPARSELUN | BLIST_LARGELUN},

Re: Request to add EMC Invista to the v2.6.x SCSI Blacklist...

[James Bottomley]

On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 10:22 -0400, conway, heather wrote:
> I'd like to request that the enclosed patch to scsi_devinfo.c be considered
> for inclusion in the v2.6.x kernel.  This would add support for sparse LUNs
> and large LUNs for the EMC Invista product.  

For 2.6, I assume this device reports compliance with SCSI-2; could you
check to see if it would actually supports the REPORT_LUNS command?  If
it does, the blacklist entry would be BLIST_REPORTLUN2; if not, then
I'll put in what you sent.

Thanks,

James

RE: Request to add EMC Invista to the v2.6.x SCSI Blacklist...

[conway, heather]

Hi James,
The information that I was provided is that the default for the Invista is
to report back as SCSI-3 compliant.
Hope this helps. 
Thanks.
Heather 

-----Original Message-----
From: James Bottomley [mailto:James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com] 
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 11:00 AM
To: conway, heather
Cc: 'linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org'
Subject: Re: Request to add EMC Invista to the v2.6.x SCSI Blacklist...

On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 10:22 -0400, conway, heather wrote:
> I'd like to request that the enclosed patch to scsi_devinfo.c be
considered
> for inclusion in the v2.6.x kernel.  This would add support for sparse
LUNs
> and large LUNs for the EMC Invista product.  

For 2.6, I assume this device reports compliance with SCSI-2; could you
check to see if it would actually supports the REPORT_LUNS command?  If
it does, the blacklist entry would be BLIST_REPORTLUN2; if not, then
I'll put in what you sent.

Thanks,

James

RE: Request to add EMC Invista to the v2.6.x SCSI Blacklist...

[James Bottomley]

On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 11:45 -0400, conway, heather wrote:
> The information that I was provided is that the default for the Invista is
> to report back as SCSI-3 compliant.
> Hope this helps. 

Well, actually, now I'm confused.  REPORT_LUNS is mandatory for a SCSI3
compliant device, and if the device reports SCSI-3 compliance we
automatically try a REPORT LUNS scan, which should mean that
BLIST_LARGE_LUN and BLIST_SPARSE_LUN are unnecessary, since we add all
LUNs returned by the scan (up to the limit of the HBA).

Could we try debugging this device to find out what its problem is?

James

RE: Request to add EMC Invista to the v2.6.x SCSI Blacklist...

[conway, heather]

Hi James,
I will request additional information from the engineer and will get back to
you as soon as I can.
Thanks.
Heather

-----Original Message-----
From: James Bottomley [mailto:James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 12:39 PM
To: conway, heather
Cc: 'linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org'
Subject: RE: Request to add EMC Invista to the v2.6.x SCSI Blacklist...

On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 11:45 -0400, conway, heather wrote:
> The information that I was provided is that the default for the Invista is
> to report back as SCSI-3 compliant.
> Hope this helps. 

Well, actually, now I'm confused.  REPORT_LUNS is mandatory for a SCSI3
compliant device, and if the device reports SCSI-3 compliance we
automatically try a REPORT LUNS scan, which should mean that
BLIST_LARGE_LUN and BLIST_SPARSE_LUN are unnecessary, since we add all
LUNs returned by the scan (up to the limit of the HBA).

Could we try debugging this device to find out what its problem is?

James