From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: RE: [PATCH] aic94xx: fix routing algorithms Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 12:18:05 -0400 Message-ID: <1152634685.3575.46.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> References: <16C8363E16D7234AB844FDB52D4AEA650C2DBB@ntserv.PacificCodeWorks.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from stat9.steeleye.com ([209.192.50.41]:57049 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751095AbWGKQSK (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jul 2006 12:18:10 -0400 In-Reply-To: <16C8363E16D7234AB844FDB52D4AEA650C2DBB@ntserv.PacificCodeWorks.local> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Robert Tarte Cc: linux-scsi On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 08:49 -0700, Robert Tarte wrote: > [Tarte, Robert] I wrote an expander simulator that I ran in user space > for the adp94xx. I extracted the routing code from the adp94xx driver > and ran through numerous configurations hand checking the table to > make > sure that it came up with the right answer. If you want to do that again, that would be great. However, mathematically, I think you'll find the results are identical for every configuration other than expander S->T connections, for which the old algorithm was provably wrong. If the original scan didn't pick this up, it's probably because that configuration isn't included ... so I think the results this time around will be completely identical. James