From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick Mansfield Subject: Re: Why REPORT LUN only for SCSI-2? Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 16:46:42 -0700 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20030717164642.A9253@beaverton.ibm.com> References: <3F140D30.D2B5C4D8@fujitsu-siemens.com> <20030715073927.A8218@beaverton.ibm.com> <3F14F7FA.BA551505@fujitsu-siemens.com> <20030716123519.A19244@beaverton.ibm.com> <3F16649C.239EC87B@fujitsu-siemens.com> <20030717184909.GD2520@nbkurt.garloff.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from e5.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.105]:17892 "EHLO e5.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271635AbTGQXbr (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jul 2003 19:31:47 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030717184909.GD2520@nbkurt.garloff.de>; from garloff@suse.de on Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 08:49:09PM +0200 List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Kurt Garloff , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Josef_M=F6llers?= , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, "Wichert, Gerhard" On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 08:49:09PM +0200, Kurt Garloff wrote: > > As a side note (probably starting a new thread) why does BLIST_LARGELUN > > override max_scsi_luns? > > It shouldn't. Did I really do this? (... checking 2.4 code ...) > No, I plead innocent. > > > If I specify on the command line that I want > > only 8 LUNs, I want only 8 LUNs and BLIST_LARGELUN overrides this with > > the HA's max_lun. > > Sure. If I don't misparse the code, this should work in 2.4. The code looks right in 2.6 also - if SCSI-3 or BLIST_LARGELUN, we use the min of max_lun and max_scsi_luns; else (SCSI-2 and not large lun) the min of 8, max_lun, and max_scsi_luns. -- Patrick Mansfield