From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 29 13:03:44 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC796106566C; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:03:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 404B18FC16; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:03:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o3TD3eFJ014992; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 07:03:41 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Scott Long In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 07:03:40 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Pete French X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 (2010-01-18) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.org, Alexander Motin , FreeBSD Stable , Andy Farkas Subject: Re: MFC of "Large set of CAM improvements" breaks I/O to Adaptec 29160 SCSI controller X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:03:44 -0000 On Apr 29, 2010, at 2:50 AM, Pete French wrote: >> Thanks. First step successful - I can steadily reproduce problem on >> CURRENT. raidtest with 200 I/O streams over gmirror of two disks on = same >> channel triggers issue in seconds. Any I/O on channel dying after = both >> disks report "Queue full" error same time. The rest of system works >> fine. If I preliminarily manually adjust queue depth of one disk - >> everything works fine. I'll investigate it tomorrow. >=20 > Glad you have managed to dupliate it - the queue depth thing is > inetersting, what changes did you make ? I can try them here and see > if they improve the situation on either of my two machines. >=20 For the record, queue-full is a common, expected condition in CAM. It's = not something that should be avoided =3D-) Scott