From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 12:58:18 -0600 Message-ID: <1202151498.3096.84.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20080124003010.18871.84095.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20080124003203.18871.52040.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from accolon.hansenpartnership.com ([76.243.235.52]:43369 "EHLO accolon.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754712AbYBDS6V (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 13:58:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20080124003203.18871.52040.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Chandra Seetharaman Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, andmike@us.ibm.com, michaelc@cs.wisc.edu, jens.axboe@oracle.com On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 16:32 -0800, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > Subject: scsi_dh: Add support for SDEV_PASSIVE > > From: Chandra Seetharaman > > This patch adds a new device state SDEV_PASSIVE, to correspond to the > passive side access of an active/passive multipathed device. Really, no; this isn't right. The state field of a SCSI device is for the SCSI state model. Passive might be a valid device mapper state, but it's not a valid SCSI state. If these patches can't work except by mucking with the SCSI state model, there's some layering problem elsewhere that needs sorting out. James