From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 21 23:53:16 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A23016A4CE for ; Sun, 21 Dec 2003 23:53:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from dns.comrax.com (dns.comrax.com [194.90.246.124]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F7CC43D4C for ; Sun, 21 Dec 2003 23:53:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from noor@comrax.com) Received: by dns.comrax.com (Postfix, from userid 10004) id A25E37256F; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:53:02 +0200 (IST) Received: from noor (mail.comrax.com [194.90.246.126]) by dns.comrax.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 434B07256C for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:53:02 +0200 (IST) From: "Noor Dawod" To: Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:52:24 +0200 Message-ID: <017c01c3c860$89fab370$a050a8c0@CORPORATE.COMRAX.COM> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Subject: ServeRAID on IBM xSeries 335 X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 07:53:16 -0000 Hello, We bought a new IBM xSeries 335 server, ServeRAID-based, with dual disks. I tried searching the archives without any success, so here are my questions: 1) What version of ServeRAID is installed in the 335 model? 2) Does FreeBSD 4.x branch support this type of ServeRAID? 3) If no driver is found for 4.x branch, is there any being developed now? 4) Given the fact that I wish to install FreeBSD on this machine, what are my options if I don't find a driver? Thanks in advance. Noor From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 22 07:22:12 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 549C316A4CE for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 07:22:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.mho.com (smtp.mho.net [64.58.4.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2772C43D50 for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 07:22:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 36299 invoked by uid 1002); 22 Dec 2003 15:22:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freebsd.org) (64.58.1.252) by smtp.mho.net with SMTP; 22 Dec 2003 15:22:08 -0000 Message-ID: <3FE70BCA.3010506@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 08:20:42 -0700 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031103 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Noor Dawod References: <017c01c3c860$89fab370$a050a8c0@CORPORATE.COMRAX.COM> In-Reply-To: <017c01c3c860$89fab370$a050a8c0@CORPORATE.COMRAX.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ServeRAID on IBM xSeries 335 X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 15:22:12 -0000 Noor Dawod wrote: > Hello, > > We bought a new IBM xSeries 335 server, ServeRAID-based, with dual disks. > I tried searching the archives without any success, so here are my > questions: > > 1) What version of ServeRAID is installed in the 335 model? > > 2) Does FreeBSD 4.x branch support this type of ServeRAID? > > 3) If no driver is found for 4.x branch, is there any being developed now? > > 4) Given the fact that I wish to install FreeBSD on this machine, what are > my options if I don't find a driver? > > Thanks in advance. > > Noor > Hi, This hardware is only supported by FreeBSD 5.x. Backporting it to 4.x is possible, but I don't have and spare time to do it right now. Scott From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 22 10:13:09 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22D9316A4CE for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 10:13:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from dns.comrax.com (dns.comrax.com [194.90.246.124]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8C8943D1F for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 10:13:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from noor@comrax.com) Received: by dns.comrax.com (Postfix, from userid 10004) id 49D9372525; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 20:12:54 +0200 (IST) Received: from noor (mail.comrax.com [194.90.246.126]) by dns.comrax.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 0D3767250B for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 20:12:54 +0200 (IST) From: "Noor Dawod" To: Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 20:12:16 +0200 Message-ID: <030501c3c8b7$226bb400$a050a8c0@CORPORATE.COMRAX.COM> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <3FE70BCA.3010506@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: ServeRAID on IBM xSeries 335 X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 18:13:09 -0000 Hi Scott, Bummer man :( This means that I would have to install Linux (ughhh) on this brand new server! Isn't there any possibility to incorporate this into the 4.x branch during this week? It's important... Thanks in advance. Noor -----Original Message----- From: Scott Long [mailto:scottl@freebsd.org] Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 5:21 PM To: Noor Dawod Cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ServeRAID on IBM xSeries 335 Noor Dawod wrote: > Hello, > > We bought a new IBM xSeries 335 server, ServeRAID-based, with dual disks. > I tried searching the archives without any success, so here are my > questions: > > 1) What version of ServeRAID is installed in the 335 model? > > 2) Does FreeBSD 4.x branch support this type of ServeRAID? > > 3) If no driver is found for 4.x branch, is there any being developed now? > > 4) Given the fact that I wish to install FreeBSD on this machine, what are > my options if I don't find a driver? > > Thanks in advance. > > Noor > Hi, This hardware is only supported by FreeBSD 5.x. Backporting it to 4.x is possible, but I don't have and spare time to do it right now. Scott From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 22 10:55:03 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3170F16A4CE for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 10:55:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from rootlabs.com (root.org [67.118.192.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 815A743DA4 for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 10:54:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nate@rootlabs.com) Received: (qmail 88826 invoked by uid 1000); 22 Dec 2003 18:54:31 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 10:54:31 -0800 (PST) From: Nate Lawson To: Noor Dawod In-Reply-To: <030501c3c8b7$226bb400$a050a8c0@CORPORATE.COMRAX.COM> Message-ID: <20031222105400.G88816@root.org> References: <030501c3c8b7$226bb400$a050a8c0@CORPORATE.COMRAX.COM> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.org Subject: RE: ServeRAID on IBM xSeries 335 X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 18:55:03 -0000 Important enough to do the MFC yourself and submit patches? -Nate On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, Noor Dawod wrote: > Hi Scott, > > Bummer man :( This means that I would have to install Linux (ughhh) on this > brand new server! > Isn't there any possibility to incorporate this into the 4.x branch during > this week? It's important... > > Thanks in advance. > > Noor > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Long [mailto:scottl@freebsd.org] > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 5:21 PM > To: Noor Dawod > Cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.org > Subject: Re: ServeRAID on IBM xSeries 335 > > > Noor Dawod wrote: > > Hello, > > > > We bought a new IBM xSeries 335 server, ServeRAID-based, with dual disks. > > I tried searching the archives without any success, so here are my > > questions: > > > > 1) What version of ServeRAID is installed in the 335 model? > > > > 2) Does FreeBSD 4.x branch support this type of ServeRAID? > > > > 3) If no driver is found for 4.x branch, is there any being developed now? > > > > 4) Given the fact that I wish to install FreeBSD on this machine, what are > > my options if I don't find a driver? > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Noor > > > > Hi, > > This hardware is only supported by FreeBSD 5.x. Backporting it to 4.x > is possible, but I don't have and spare time to do it right now. > > Scott > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-scsi-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 22 11:05:03 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53FFC16A4CE for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 11:05:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8211543D5F for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 11:04:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (peter@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hBMJ34FR069353 for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 11:03:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Received: (from peter@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id hBMJ34Nb069347 for scsi@freebsd.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 11:03:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 11:03:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200312221903.hBMJ34Nb069347@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: peter set sender to owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: scsi@FreeBSD.org Subject: Current problem reports assigned to you X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 19:05:03 -0000 Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems Serious problems Non-critical problems S Submitted Tracker Resp. Description ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- f [1999/12/21] kern/15608 scsi acd0 / cd0 give inconsistent errors on em 1 problem total. From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 27 09:06:16 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1748B16A4CE for ; Sat, 27 Dec 2003 09:06:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from bache.ece.cmu.edu (BACHE.ECE.CMU.EDU [128.2.129.23]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8955843D1F for ; Sat, 27 Dec 2003 09:06:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from griffin2+freebsd-scsi@ece.cmu.edu) Received: by bache.ece.cmu.edu (Postfix, from userid 953) id C84A69E; Sat, 27 Dec 2003 12:06:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from GLEE.PDL.CMU.EDU (GLEE.PDL.CMU.EDU [128.2.134.120]) by bache.ece.cmu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA5F79C for ; Sat, 27 Dec 2003 12:05:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 12:05:43 -0500 (EST) From: John Linwood Griffin X-X-Sender: griffin2+freebsd-scsi@glee.pdl.cmu.edu To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01 version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) Subject: scsi_target experiences and questions X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 17:06:16 -0000 Greetings to all, In regards the scsi_target code, I'd like to share some experiences and ask a few questions. I've been working with scsi_target with FreeBSD 4.8-R and 5.1-R targets and mostly Linux 2.4.[18,20] initiators, using both Fibre Channel (Qlogic QLA2100) and Parallel SCSI (Adaptec 29160) connections. First, the experiences: 1) Chuck Tuffli wrote to this list in August about having trouble using anything but LUN "0" when configuring a Qlogic card in target mode. (The specific error was "enable lun CCB rejected, status 0x39".) I had this problem also, and it seemed to disappear after I enabled the card's BIOS in the Alt-Q setup utility. Also in the BIOS, I set the execution throttle to 255, because 256 was incorrectly read as "0" during system boot. 2) I had a problem that the cam/scsi/scsi_target kernel code wouldn't shut down cleanly: The TARGIOCDISABLE call would never return, and the system had to be reboot between emulator invocations. I tracked this down to the "tsleep()" (msleep() in 5.1?) that immediately follows the comment "If we aborted at least one pending CCB ok, wait for it." I commented out the tsleep() call, which appears to allow it to be cleanly shut down and restarted multiple times. (Perhaps that's causing some kernel state to not get cleaned up?) This was using the fibre channel card -- I haven't tested whether the problem exists using parallel SCSI. 3) I had to disable the "pending unit attention" that is set to indicate the device's "powering on". (I.e., I commented out the line "istate->pending_ua = UA_POWER_ON" in scsi_cmds.c.) This was because a FreeBSD initiator wasn't correctly handling the CHECK CONDITION status received during the READ CAPACITY command, and instead tried reading an invalid geometry. (This was also only tested with fibre channel. Also, it was before I tried enabling autosense, which may fix the problem.) Without this comment, the device was seen as: da1: Fixed Direct Access SCSI-3 device da1: 100.000MB/s transfers da1: 0MB (268784067 0 byte sectors: 0H 0S/T 0C) Once the comment was in place, it was correctly read as: da1: Fixed Direct Access SCSI-3 device da1: 100.000MB/s transfers da1: 20MB (40960 512 byte sectors: 64H 32S/T 20C) 4) This isn't specifically related to the scsi_target code, but I was surprised to find that the AIO code has a race condition: if you aio_write block X, then immediately synchronously read block X before the AIO code commits the written block to disk, you'll get the old version of X during the read. I worked around this by always doing synchronous writes. 5) Kudos to Nate Lawson and Justin Gibbs for all their good work. I recommend that Nate add a "FAQ" section to his scsi_target page with some of the other relevant goodies that have been posted to this list (for example, Kenneth Merry posted some gems about enabling autosense and increasing MAX_INITIATORS); that would aid in us users getting working systems more quickly. 6) I think I've finally figured out the execution path for READ and WRITE requests through the scsi_target.c and scsi_cmds.c files. Nate is either an unparalleled genius (for getting it to work in the first place) or a diabolical masochist (for knowing that the rest of us would tear our hair out following his multiple re-entries into the tcmd_handle() function). Going off the top of my head, here are a few pointers for anyone else digging through the code. (Note that I may be wrong in places.) "ATIO" stands for "Accept Target I/O". At startup, the user code allocates space for a bunch of ATIOs and gives them to the kernel. When new requests arrive on the SCSI bus, the kernel sends one of these ATIOs back to the user. "CTIO" stands for "Continue Target I/O". CTIOs are used to transfer data between the user and kernel processes. This is necessary because each CTIO can only handle DFLTPHYS (or maybe MAXPHYS) amount of data, but SCSI requests can be larger than that. Once the request is done processing, the user code sends the ATIO back to the kernel for reuse. The user signals that a READ request is complete [i.e., then the kernel code is permitted to finish the bus transaction] by sending the final CTIO, and it signals that a WRITE request is complete by sending the final ATIO. I found it very useful to print out function names (as well as ATIO and CTIO pointers) as functions were entered; this greatly helped my understanding of how READ and WRITE requests were processed. Now, for a few questions: A) How difficult will it be to add tagged queuing support to the Adaptec driver? (Or, is the missing piece simply support in the scsi_target user code?) I would find this capability extremely useful. B) I've been having a maddening problem using tagged queuing with fibre channel. When the system is under high write load (e.g., if I am emulating a large disk and I run mkfs over the disk) the scsi_target will crash in a seemingly nondeterministic way. (Note, I am using a modified version of scsi_target, but I haven't changed its core behavior.) Sometimes an ATIO is received with its flags field set to zero (causing work_atio() to abort) -- this would seem to indicate that the ATIO were sent before the data were received from the initiator, but this seems impossible based on my cursory look over the Qlogic driver code. Other times I start getting a series of error messages on the console [it may be the "no ATIO2s for lun 0 from initiator 3" message, but I'm not certain -- I can reproduce the exact message if it will help this debugging] but I don't think it's run out of ATIOs, because I increased the number to 1024 and there were only about ten outstanding requests at the time. My best guesses are that because of the high write load some kernel structures are getting overwritten, or linked lists of free/allocated ATIOs in the kernel are being improperly managed, but the answer is so far eluding me. A colleague suggested it may be mishandling of tagged requests by the XPT code, but that seems unlikely. Does anyone have any idea what might be causing this, or what a solution might be (other than rate-limiting the initiator)?