From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: HighPoint Linux Team Subject: Re: [PATCH] hptiop: HighPoint RocketRAID 3xxx controller driver Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:18:08 +0800 Message-ID: <200606111918.08529.linux@highpoint-tech.com> References: <200606111706.52930.linux@highpoint-tech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from stats.hypersurf.com ([209.237.0.12]:4883 "EHLO stats.hypersurf.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750771AbWFKLDw (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:03:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200606111706.52930.linux@highpoint-tech.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org On Sunday 11 June 2006 05:07 pm, HighPoint Linux Team wrote: >> >> host->can_queue = le32_to_cpu(iop_config.max_requests); >> host->cmd_per_lun = le32_to_cpu(iop_config.max_requests); >> >> You might want to think about adjusting this. For the single LUN case, >> it's fine. For the multi-lun case it may allow commands to a single LUN >> to starve everything else. > >There will be no multi-lun support for the controller so this is not >an issue. Sorry, a mistake. Multi-lun is supported. Should host->can_queue be set to (cmd_per_lun * max_lun) ?