Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues... - Kernel

This is a discussion on Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues... - Kernel ; 4p ia64, 24GB RAM, 2.6.25-rc3, qla1280, 15krpm scsi disk. Direct I/O: dgc@budgie:~/xfstests$ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb6 bs=1024k count=1024 oflag=direct 1024+0 records in 1024+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 27.8974 s, 38.5 MB/s Doing approximately 80 512k I/os per ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

  1. Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

    4p ia64, 24GB RAM, 2.6.25-rc3, qla1280, 15krpm scsi disk.

    Direct I/O:

    dgc@budgie:~/xfstests$ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb6 bs=1024k count=1024 oflag=direct
    1024+0 records in
    1024+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 27.8974 s, 38.5 MB/s

    Doing approximately 80 512k I/os per second (disk bandwidth).

    Buffered I/O:

    dgc@budgie:~/xfstests$ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb6 bs=1024k count=4096
    4096+0 records in
    4096+0 records out
    4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 427.872 s, 10.0 MB/s

    Which was doing about 200 64k I/Os per second for the entire write.
    Interactivity goes to hell, cpu usage is pretty much zero. I can
    barely run anything, I can't ctrl-c out of running programs, etc.

    It would appear that the block device is being flushed one sector at
    a time:

    8,22 3 8757 26.699052800 12143 Q W 9770471 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8760 26.699058050 12143 Q W 9770472 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8763 26.699063300 12143 Q W 9770473 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8766 26.699068900 12143 Q W 9770474 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8769 26.699074150 12143 Q W 9770475 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8772 26.699079400 12143 Q W 9770476 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8775 26.699084650 12143 Q W 9770477 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8778 26.699090200 12143 Q W 9770478 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8781 26.699095600 12143 Q W 9770479 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8784 26.699100800 12143 Q W 9770480 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8787 26.699106100 12143 Q W 9770481 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8790 26.699111700 12143 Q W 9770482 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8793 26.699117000 12143 Q W 9770483 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8796 26.699122250 12143 Q W 9770484 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8799 26.699127500 12143 Q W 9770485 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8802 26.699133100 12143 Q W 9770486 + 1 [sync]
    8,22 3 8805 26.699138450 12143 Q W 9770487 + 1 [sync]

    And it's only combining into 128 sector I/Os. Something wrong
    with bio merging limiting the I/os to 128 elements? I'm using BSG
    here, so maybe that's a factor.....

    I also suspect that CTQ has not been set up correctly on this
    kernel, because:

    $ cat /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    3
    $ ls -l /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    -r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 Mar 20 09:59 /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    $

    It appears to be hard coded to 3 and can't be changed....

    Hmmm:

    $ sudo sdparm -s WCE=1 /dev/sdb
    SCSI INQUIRY command failed on /dev/sdb
    $

    Did I miss some new config option, or are things just generally broken?

    Cheers,

    Dave.

    --
    Dave Chinner
    Principal Engineer
    SGI Australian Software Group
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  2. Re: Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

    On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:16:54AM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
    > 4p ia64, 24GB RAM, 2.6.25-rc3, qla1280, 15krpm scsi disk.
    >
    > Direct I/O:
    >
    > dgc@budgie:~/xfstests$ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb6 bs=1024k count=1024 oflag=direct
    > 1024+0 records in
    > 1024+0 records out
    > 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 27.8974 s, 38.5 MB/s
    >
    > Doing approximately 80 512k I/os per second (disk bandwidth).
    >
    > Buffered I/O:
    >
    > dgc@budgie:~/xfstests$ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb6 bs=1024k count=4096
    > 4096+0 records in
    > 4096+0 records out
    > 4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 427.872 s, 10.0 MB/s


    How big is sdb6? How many '2's do you see in

    factor `cat /sys/block/sdb/sdb6/size`

    > I also suspect that CTQ has not been set up correctly on this
    > kernel, because:
    >
    > $ cat /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > 3
    > $ ls -l /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > -r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 Mar 20 09:59 /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > $
    >
    > It appears to be hard coded to 3 and can't be changed....


    That's a bug in the qla1280 driver. I thought that had gotten fixed.
    It's looking at the wrong mailbox register after setting device parameters.

    jeremy
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  3. Re: Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

    On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:08:07 -0700 Jeremy Higdon wrote:
    >


    (cc's added. It matters)

    > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:16:54AM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
    > > 4p ia64, 24GB RAM, 2.6.25-rc3, qla1280, 15krpm scsi disk.
    > >
    > > Direct I/O:
    > >
    > > dgc@budgie:~/xfstests$ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb6 bs=1024k count=1024 oflag=direct
    > > 1024+0 records in
    > > 1024+0 records out
    > > 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 27.8974 s, 38.5 MB/s
    > >
    > > Doing approximately 80 512k I/os per second (disk bandwidth).
    > >
    > > Buffered I/O:
    > >
    > > dgc@budgie:~/xfstests$ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb6 bs=1024k count=4096
    > > 4096+0 records in
    > > 4096+0 records out
    > > 4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 427.872 s, 10.0 MB/s

    >
    > How big is sdb6? How many '2's do you see in
    >
    > factor `cat /sys/block/sdb/sdb6/size`


    There have always been problems with thsi and I'm not sure that anyone
    cared enough about buffered writes to blockdevs to get to the bottom of
    them.

    I assume you aren't running i386 highmem...


    > > I also suspect that CTQ has not been set up correctly on this
    > > kernel, because:
    > >
    > > $ cat /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > 3
    > > $ ls -l /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > -r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 Mar 20 09:59 /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > $
    > >
    > > It appears to be hard coded to 3 and can't be changed....

    >
    > That's a bug in the qla1280 driver. I thought that had gotten fixed.
    > It's looking at the wrong mailbox register after setting device parameters.
    >


    Was there a patch anywhere?
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  4. Re: Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

    On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 6:20 AM, Andrew Morton
    wrote:
    > On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:08:07 -0700 Jeremy Higdon wrote:
    > >

    >
    > (cc's added. It matters)
    >
    >
    > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:16:54AM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
    > > > 4p ia64, 24GB RAM, 2.6.25-rc3, qla1280, 15krpm scsi disk.
    > > >
    > > > Direct I/O:
    > > >
    > > > dgc@budgie:~/xfstests$ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb6 bs=1024k count=1024 oflag=direct
    > > > 1024+0 records in
    > > > 1024+0 records out
    > > > 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 27.8974 s, 38.5 MB/s
    > > >
    > > > Doing approximately 80 512k I/os per second (disk bandwidth).
    > > >
    > > > Buffered I/O:
    > > >
    > > > dgc@budgie:~/xfstests$ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb6 bs=1024k count=4096
    > > > 4096+0 records in
    > > > 4096+0 records out
    > > > 4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 427.872 s, 10.0 MB/s

    > >
    > > How big is sdb6? How many '2's do you see in
    > >
    > > factor `cat /sys/block/sdb/sdb6/size`

    >
    > There have always been problems with thsi and I'm not sure that anyone
    > cared enough about buffered writes to blockdevs to get to the bottom of
    > them.
    >
    > I assume you aren't running i386 highmem...


    I've experienced the same kind of degradation with buffered IO vs
    direct specifically when using Linux partitions. Using the full block
    device doesn't create such fragmented IOs.

    The problem was reported to the blktrace list some weeks ago by my
    coworker (cc'ing Ming):
    http://marc.info/?l=linux-btrace&m=120296070516776&w=2
    (fyi, Ming forgot to use oflag=sync, this explains the weird results
    when doing buffered writes while blktrace'ing)

    To summarize a little more (without messing round with partition
    alignment), the test system is x86_64 with 4GB, storage is directly
    connected via aacraid, 7200 rpm SATA disk.

    Using:
    dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdhX bs=1M oflag=sync count=4 seek=2
    and
    dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdhX bs=1M oflag=direct count=4 seek=2

    full disk case (sdh):
    buffered writes are +8 and being merged to 3 512k requests, 1 8k and 1
    504k (27MB/s)
    odirect writes are all +512 (35MB/s)

    partitioned case: a 3GB sdh1 and ~720GB sdh2.
    buffered writes to partition1 are +1 and are merged to 65k requests (10.3MB/s)
    buffered writes to partition2 are +2 and are merged to 130k requests (15.2MB/s)
    odirect writes to either partition are all +512 (27MB/s)

    So it appears partition size matters (at least in this case)?

    As you can see performing buffered writes to a partition resulted in
    very small requests, much like David reported in his original post (+1
    or +2 via blktrace).

    This happens with every kernel tried; 2.6.22, 2.6.24, RHEL5U1, etc.
    cfq vs deadline doesn't change anything. For partitions, changing
    partition alignment to a power of 2 actually hurt!?

    Mike
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  5. Re: Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

    On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 03:20:10AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:08:07 -0700 Jeremy Higdon wrote:
    > > > I also suspect that CTQ has not been set up correctly on this
    > > > kernel, because:
    > > >
    > > > $ cat /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > 3
    > > > $ ls -l /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > -r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 Mar 20 09:59 /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > $
    > > >
    > > > It appears to be hard coded to 3 and can't be changed....

    > >
    > > That's a bug in the qla1280 driver. I thought that had gotten fixed.
    > > It's looking at the wrong mailbox register after setting device parameters.
    > >

    >
    > Was there a patch anywhere?


    I thought so, but maybe not. I'll go looking for what happened and then
    forward one, but it'll take a couple of weeks, unless I can get Jes to
    do it, as I'm going on vacation/holiday for a week.

    jeremy
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  6. [PATCH] drivers/scsi/qla1280.c; was Re: Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

    On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 03:20:10AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > > > I also suspect that CTQ has not been set up correctly on this
    > > > kernel, because:
    > > >
    > > > $ cat /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > 3
    > > > $ ls -l /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > -r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 Mar 20 09:59 /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > $
    > > >
    > > > It appears to be hard coded to 3 and can't be changed....

    > >
    > > That's a bug in the qla1280 driver. I thought that had gotten fixed.
    > > It's looking at the wrong mailbox register after setting device parameters.

    >
    > Was there a patch anywhere?


    Promised patch...

    The qla1280 driver was ANDing the output value of mailbox register
    0 with (1 << target-number) to determine whether to enable queueing
    on the target in question.

    But mailbox register 0 has the status code for the mailbox command
    (in this case, Set Target Parameters). Potential values are:
    /*
    * ISP mailbox command complete status codes
    */
    #define MBS_CMD_CMP 0x4000 /* Command Complete. */
    #define MBS_INV_CMD 0x4001 /* Invalid Command. */
    #define MBS_HOST_INF_ERR 0x4002 /* Host Interface Error. */
    #define MBS_TEST_FAILED 0x4003 /* Test Failed. */
    #define MBS_CMD_ERR 0x4005 /* Command Error. */
    #define MBS_CMD_PARAM_ERR 0x4006 /* Command Parameter Error. */

    So clearly that is in error. I can't think what the author of that
    line was looking for in a mailbox register, so I just eliminated the
    AND. flag is used later in the function, and I think that the later
    usage was also wrong, though it was used to set values that aren't
    used. Oh well, an overhaul of this driver is not what I want to do
    now -- just a bugfix.

    After the fix, I found that my disks were getting a queue depth of
    255, which is far too many. Most SCSI disks are limited to 32 or
    64. In any case, there's no point, queueing up a bunch of commands
    to the adapter that will just result in queue full or starve other
    targets from being issued commands due to running out of internal
    memory. So I dropped default queue depth to 32 (from which 1 is
    subtracted elsewhere, giving net of 31).

    I tested with a Seagate ST336753LC, and results look good, so
    I'm satisfied with this patch.

    Signed-off-by: Jeremy Higdon


    ---


    --- a/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c 2008-05-03 11:59:44.000000000 -0700
    +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c 2008-05-10 21:32:23.451341969 -0700
    @@ -2007,7 +2007,7 @@ qla1280_set_defaults(struct scsi_qla_hos
    nv->bus[bus].config_2.req_ack_active_negation = 1;
    nv->bus[bus].config_2.data_line_active_negation = 1;
    nv->bus[bus].selection_timeout = 250;
    - nv->bus[bus].max_queue_depth = 256;
    + nv->bus[bus].max_queue_depth = 32;

    if (IS_ISP1040(ha)) {
    nv->bus[bus].bus_reset_delay = 3;
    @@ -2051,7 +2051,7 @@ qla1280_config_target(struct scsi_qla_ho
    status = qla1280_mailbox_command(ha, 0x0f, mb);

    /* Save Tag queuing enable flag. */
    - flag = (BIT_0 << target) & mb[0];
    + flag = (BIT_0 << target);
    if (nv->bus[bus].target[target].parameter.tag_queuing)
    ha->bus_settings[bus].qtag_enables |= flag;

    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  7. Re: [PATCH] drivers/scsi/qla1280.c; was Re: Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

    On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 11:17:03PM -0700, Jeremy Higdon wrote:
    > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 03:20:10AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > > > > I also suspect that CTQ has not been set up correctly on this
    > > > > kernel, because:
    > > > >
    > > > > $ cat /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > > 3
    > > > > $ ls -l /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > > -r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 Mar 20 09:59 /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > > $
    > > > >
    > > > > It appears to be hard coded to 3 and can't be changed....
    > > >
    > > > That's a bug in the qla1280 driver. I thought that had gotten fixed.
    > > > It's looking at the wrong mailbox register after setting device parameters.

    > >
    > > Was there a patch anywhere?

    >
    > Promised patch...

    .....
    > After the fix, I found that my disks were getting a queue depth of
    > 255, which is far too many. Most SCSI disks are limited to 32 or
    > 64. In any case, there's no point, queueing up a bunch of commands
    > to the adapter that will just result in queue full or starve other
    > targets from being issued commands due to running out of internal
    > memory. So I dropped default queue depth to 32 (from which 1 is
    > subtracted elsewhere, giving net of 31).
    >
    > I tested with a Seagate ST336753LC, and results look good, so
    > I'm satisfied with this patch.
    >
    > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Higdon


    Works fine here.

    Tested-by: Dave Chinner

    Cheers,

    Dave.
    --
    Dave Chinner
    Principal Engineer
    SGI Australian Software Group
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  8. Re: [PATCH] drivers/scsi/qla1280.c; was Re: Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

    On Sun, 11 May 2008 23:17:03 -0700
    Jeremy Higdon wrote:

    > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 03:20:10AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > > > > I also suspect that CTQ has not been set up correctly on this
    > > > > kernel, because:
    > > > >
    > > > > $ cat /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > > 3
    > > > > $ ls -l /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > > -r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 Mar 20 09:59 /sys/block/sdb/device/queue_depth
    > > > > $
    > > > >
    > > > > It appears to be hard coded to 3 and can't be changed....
    > > >
    > > > That's a bug in the qla1280 driver. I thought that had gotten fixed.
    > > > It's looking at the wrong mailbox register after setting device parameters.

    > >
    > > Was there a patch anywhere?

    >
    > Promised patch...
    >
    > The qla1280 driver was ANDing the output value of mailbox register
    > 0 with (1 << target-number) to determine whether to enable queueing
    > on the target in question.
    >
    > But mailbox register 0 has the status code for the mailbox command
    > (in this case, Set Target Parameters). Potential values are:
    > /*
    > * ISP mailbox command complete status codes
    > */
    > #define MBS_CMD_CMP 0x4000 /* Command Complete. */
    > #define MBS_INV_CMD 0x4001 /* Invalid Command. */
    > #define MBS_HOST_INF_ERR 0x4002 /* Host Interface Error. */
    > #define MBS_TEST_FAILED 0x4003 /* Test Failed. */
    > #define MBS_CMD_ERR 0x4005 /* Command Error. */
    > #define MBS_CMD_PARAM_ERR 0x4006 /* Command Parameter Error. */
    >
    > So clearly that is in error. I can't think what the author of that
    > line was looking for in a mailbox register, so I just eliminated the
    > AND. flag is used later in the function, and I think that the later
    > usage was also wrong, though it was used to set values that aren't
    > used. Oh well, an overhaul of this driver is not what I want to do
    > now -- just a bugfix.
    >
    > After the fix, I found that my disks were getting a queue depth of
    > 255, which is far too many. Most SCSI disks are limited to 32 or
    > 64. In any case, there's no point, queueing up a bunch of commands
    > to the adapter that will just result in queue full or starve other
    > targets from being issued commands due to running out of internal
    > memory. So I dropped default queue depth to 32 (from which 1 is
    > subtracted elsewhere, giving net of 31).
    >
    > I tested with a Seagate ST336753LC, and results look good, so
    > I'm satisfied with this patch.
    >
    > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Higdon
    >
    >
    > ---
    >
    >
    > --- a/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c 2008-05-03 11:59:44.000000000 -0700
    > +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c 2008-05-10 21:32:23.451341969 -0700
    > @@ -2007,7 +2007,7 @@ qla1280_set_defaults(struct scsi_qla_hos
    > nv->bus[bus].config_2.req_ack_active_negation = 1;
    > nv->bus[bus].config_2.data_line_active_negation = 1;
    > nv->bus[bus].selection_timeout = 250;
    > - nv->bus[bus].max_queue_depth = 256;
    > + nv->bus[bus].max_queue_depth = 32;
    >
    > if (IS_ISP1040(ha)) {
    > nv->bus[bus].bus_reset_delay = 3;
    > @@ -2051,7 +2051,7 @@ qla1280_config_target(struct scsi_qla_ho
    > status = qla1280_mailbox_command(ha, 0x0f, mb);
    >
    > /* Save Tag queuing enable flag. */
    > - flag = (BIT_0 << target) & mb[0];
    > + flag = (BIT_0 << target);
    > if (nv->bus[bus].target[target].parameter.tag_queuing)
    > ha->bus_settings[bus].qtag_enables |= flag;


    Thanks. I tagged this for a -stable backport (assuming that is
    appropriate?)


    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  9. Re: [PATCH] drivers/scsi/qla1280.c; was Re: Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

    Andrew Morton wrote:
    >> --- a/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c 2008-05-03 11:59:44.000000000 -0700
    >> +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c 2008-05-10 21:32:23.451341969 -0700
    >> @@ -2007,7 +2007,7 @@ qla1280_set_defaults(struct scsi_qla_hos
    >> nv->bus[bus].config_2.req_ack_active_negation = 1;
    >> nv->bus[bus].config_2.data_line_active_negation = 1;
    >> nv->bus[bus].selection_timeout = 250;
    >> - nv->bus[bus].max_queue_depth = 256;
    >> + nv->bus[bus].max_queue_depth = 32;
    >>
    >> if (IS_ISP1040(ha)) {
    >> nv->bus[bus].bus_reset_delay = 3;
    >> @@ -2051,7 +2051,7 @@ qla1280_config_target(struct scsi_qla_ho
    >> status = qla1280_mailbox_command(ha, 0x0f, mb);
    >>
    >> /* Save Tag queuing enable flag. */
    >> - flag = (BIT_0 << target) & mb[0];
    >> + flag = (BIT_0 << target);
    >> if (nv->bus[bus].target[target].parameter.tag_queuing)
    >> ha->bus_settings[bus].qtag_enables |= flag;

    >
    > Thanks. I tagged this for a -stable backport (assuming that is
    > appropriate?)
    >


    Sounds good, given the nature of this it should go into stable as well
    as current.

    Acked-by: Jes Sorensen

    Cheers,
    Jes

    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  10. Re: [PATCH] drivers/scsi/qla1280.c; was Re: Buffered I/O to block device very slow and other SCSI issues...

    On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 09:15:46AM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
    > Andrew Morton wrote:
    > >>--- a/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c 2008-05-03 11:59:44.000000000 -0700
    > >>+++ b/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c 2008-05-10 21:32:23.451341969 -0700
    > >>@@ -2007,7 +2007,7 @@ qla1280_set_defaults(struct scsi_qla_hos
    > >> nv->bus[bus].config_2.req_ack_active_negation = 1;
    > >> nv->bus[bus].config_2.data_line_active_negation = 1;
    > >> nv->bus[bus].selection_timeout = 250;
    > >>- nv->bus[bus].max_queue_depth = 256;
    > >>+ nv->bus[bus].max_queue_depth = 32;
    > >>
    > >> if (IS_ISP1040(ha)) {
    > >> nv->bus[bus].bus_reset_delay = 3;
    > >>@@ -2051,7 +2051,7 @@ qla1280_config_target(struct scsi_qla_ho
    > >> status = qla1280_mailbox_command(ha, 0x0f, mb);
    > >>
    > >> /* Save Tag queuing enable flag. */
    > >>- flag = (BIT_0 << target) & mb[0];
    > >>+ flag = (BIT_0 << target);
    > >> if (nv->bus[bus].target[target].parameter.tag_queuing)
    > >> ha->bus_settings[bus].qtag_enables |= flag;

    > >
    > >Thanks. I tagged this for a -stable backport (assuming that is
    > >appropriate?)
    > >

    >
    > Sounds good, given the nature of this it should go into stable as well
    > as current.


    I agree.

    > Acked-by: Jes Sorensen



    jeremy
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

+ Reply to Thread