From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262205AbVHAOje (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2005 10:39:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262104AbVHAOjU (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2005 10:39:20 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:64434 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262218AbVHAOia (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2005 10:38:30 -0400 Subject: RE: AACRAID failure with 2.6.13-rc1 From: Mark Haverkamp To: Mark Salyzyn Cc: Andrew Morton , Martin Drab , linux-kernel In-Reply-To: <60807403EABEB443939A5A7AA8A7458B01792901@otce2k01.adaptec.com> References: <60807403EABEB443939A5A7AA8A7458B01792901@otce2k01.adaptec.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 07:38:24 -0700 Message-Id: <1122907104.24183.8.camel@markh1.pdx.osdl.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 07:44 -0400, Salyzyn, Mark wrote: > Yes, please put the workaround into 2.6.13! I have re-submitted the patch that I sent a couple weeks ago to James and the linus-scsi mailing list. Mark. > > Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn > > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Morton [mailto:akpm@osdl.org] > Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 3:59 PM > To: Salyzyn, Mark > Cc: drab@kepler.fjfi.cvut.cz; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > markh@osdl.org > Subject: Re: AACRAID failure with 2.6.13-rc1 > > "Salyzyn, Mark" wrote: > > > > Martin may be overplaying the performance angle. > > > > A previous patch took the adapter from 64K to 4MB transaction sizes > > across the board. This caused Martin's adapter and drive combination > to > > tip-over. We had to scale back to 128KB sized transactions to get > > stability on his system. All systems handled the 4MB I/O size in our > > tests, but the tests that were done some time ago were not performed > > with the latest kernel, which contributed to a change in testing > > corners. > > Confused. The above appears to indicate that we should put the > workaround > into 2.6.13, yes? > -- Mark Haverkamp