From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161268AbXDWS0o (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:26:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161260AbXDWS0o (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:26:44 -0400 Received: from hancock.steeleye.com ([71.30.118.248]:49706 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161268AbXDWS0n (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:26:43 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] fix for async scsi scan sysfs problem (resend) From: James Bottomley To: Josef Bacik Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox In-Reply-To: <20070423181318.GD22873@korben.rdu.redhat.com> References: <20070419132459.GB1481@korben.rdu.redhat.com> <1176991356.31764.3.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> <20070419150655.GC1481@korben.rdu.redhat.com> <20070421002345.673d9988.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070421135956.GA22873@korben.rdu.redhat.com> <20070423181318.GD22873@korben.rdu.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:26:26 -0400 Message-Id: <1177352786.6284.51.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.3 (2.8.3-2.fc6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 14:13 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > Ok I have a new patch that I've built and tested on both my UP and SMP machine > and it appears to work fine. I took the async check out of scsi_add_lun, I > don't really see the point in waiting to do the sysfs registration stuff (if > theres a reason I haven't been able to find it in the original submission of > this functionality). Please let me know if this is incorrect. Thank you, Yes, it's incorrect ... if you do this, the devices will come up in a random order for multiple SCSI cards. One of the original design goals was not to require udev, so the final ordering should be the same as for the sync case. I think the root cause of the problem is somewhere in the fc transport rport addition code. James