[ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

I've pushed out new version of the for-3.17 core and drivers trees:

  git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git core-for-3.17
  git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git drivers-for-3.17

In the core tree the biggest news is the old target infrastructure
removal, in addition a few warnings due to 64-bit LUNs have been fixed,
and the tree has been rebased to 3.16-rc4 to pick up all updates that
went into the Linux 3.16 release candidates.

The drivers-for-3.17 tree is new, and I should have picked up all
properly reviewed patches.

Most notably missing from the drivers tree are the mpt2sas and mpt3sas
series and the scsi_debug update which need a review, and the megaraid
and pm8001 uptdates which need a resend.  Missing from the core tree
is the scsi-mq work that still needs a proper review.

Also notably absent is the flush error handling fix, which still needs a
signoff from James and a proper review.  As far as I'm concerned that
fix should still go into 3.16.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

I've pushed out updates to both the core-for-3.17 and drivers-for-3.17
branches.  I think we're in a good shape for the merge window, but
I'd still like to get reviewers attention for a few driver updates that
I'd love to get in still:

 - my eata patch to remove the driver_lock
 - the partially reviewed megaraid series
 - the arcmsr series

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[James Bottomley]

On Fri, 2014-08-01 at 05:20 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I've pushed out updates to both the core-for-3.17 and drivers-for-3.17
> branches.

So I'm afraid we missed the last -next build on these, so they can't go
in with the early SCSI pull.  I'm open to doing one mid merge window,
but Linus tends not to like that.

James

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 04:32:01PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-08-01 at 05:20 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > I've pushed out updates to both the core-for-3.17 and drivers-for-3.17
> > branches.
> 
> So I'm afraid we missed the last -next build on these, so they can't go
> in with the early SCSI pull.  I'm open to doing one mid merge window,
> but Linus tends not to like that.

I don't think there are any hard and fast rules.


The core-for-3.17 commit is a trivial printk specifier regression fix for
something introduced in the 3.17 merge window, so pulling it in is
an absolute non-brainer.

The drivers side are a bunch of smaller fixes for iscsi and pm8001 which
never have been a problem to put in near the end of the merge window,
especially if they have a few more days linux-next exposure in
Linux-next even after the 3.16 release.  They absolutely would be
candidates for a second pull even if they'd miss the first pull.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 802 bytes --]

Hi Christoph,

On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 04:11:47 -0700 Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 04:32:01PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-08-01 at 05:20 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > I've pushed out updates to both the core-for-3.17 and drivers-for-3.17
> > > branches.
> > 
> > So I'm afraid we missed the last -next build on these, so they can't go
> > in with the early SCSI pull.  I'm open to doing one mid merge window,
> > but Linus tends not to like that.

You realise that neither of these in linux-next as the scsi-core and
scsi-drivers trees had for-3.16 branches in the last round.  I assume I
should just drop these trees completely from linux-next?

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 09:30:59PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> You realise that neither of these in linux-next as the scsi-core and
> scsi-drivers trees had for-3.16 branches in the last round.  I assume I
> should just drop these trees completely from linux-next?

Well, they get pulled in through James, so you can drop them for now.

I mostly put you on Cc so you could comment wether there are any hard
rules on how long even those simple fixes should be in linux-next.  I
know you've put up stats for a few of the last merge windows about
patches that weren't in linux-next, so there's been some tracking of it
for sure.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1256 bytes --]

Hi Christoph,

On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 04:34:04 -0700 Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 09:30:59PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > You realise that neither of these in linux-next as the scsi-core and
> > scsi-drivers trees had for-3.16 branches in the last round.  I assume I
> > should just drop these trees completely from linux-next?
> 
> Well, they get pulled in through James, so you can drop them for now.

Will do.

> I mostly put you on Cc so you could comment wether there are any hard
> rules on how long even those simple fixes should be in linux-next.  I
> know you've put up stats for a few of the last merge windows about
> patches that weren't in linux-next, so there's been some tracking of it
> for sure.

If they are simple, clear fixes, then maybe a day or two just for build
coverage, but it is very much up to the maintainer.  There are always a
few poatches that get through late (quote a few of which I suspect have
been "in train", just not yet published in the maintainer's tree).

And, of course, real fixes go in just about anytime ...

I don't think we believe in hard rules for anything :-)
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[James Bottomley]

On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 04:11 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 04:32:01PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-08-01 at 05:20 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > I've pushed out updates to both the core-for-3.17 and drivers-for-3.17
> > > branches.
> > 
> > So I'm afraid we missed the last -next build on these, so they can't go
> > in with the early SCSI pull.  I'm open to doing one mid merge window,
> > but Linus tends not to like that.
> 
> I don't think there are any hard and fast rules.

True, but the hardest of our semi-liquid rules is nothing in the merge
window that wasn't in -next first.

> The core-for-3.17 commit is a trivial printk specifier regression fix for
> something introduced in the 3.17 merge window, so pulling it in is
> an absolute non-brainer.
> 
> The drivers side are a bunch of smaller fixes for iscsi and pm8001 which
> never have been a problem to put in near the end of the merge window,
> especially if they have a few more days linux-next exposure in
> Linux-next even after the 3.16 release.  They absolutely would be
> candidates for a second pull even if they'd miss the first pull.

OK, since I have to do a second pull anyway we might as well follow the
rules.

James

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 07:20:04AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > The drivers side are a bunch of smaller fixes for iscsi and pm8001 which
> > never have been a problem to put in near the end of the merge window,
> > especially if they have a few more days linux-next exposure in
> > Linux-next even after the 3.16 release.  They absolutely would be
> > candidates for a second pull even if they'd miss the first pull.
> 
> OK, since I have to do a second pull anyway we might as well follow the
> rules.

Ok, new tree is out, the core-for-3.17 has the one 64-bit lun format
string fix that didn't make it into the first pull request, the
queuecommand device busy regression fix, and the cmd_pool fix.

The drivers-for-3.17 just has the driver updates I pushed earlier that
didn't make the cut.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[James Bottomley]

On Thu, 2014-08-14 at 05:54 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 07:20:04AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > The drivers side are a bunch of smaller fixes for iscsi and pm8001 which
> > > never have been a problem to put in near the end of the merge window,
> > > especially if they have a few more days linux-next exposure in
> > > Linux-next even after the 3.16 release.  They absolutely would be
> > > candidates for a second pull even if they'd miss the first pull.
> > 
> > OK, since I have to do a second pull anyway we might as well follow the
> > rules.
> 
> Ok, new tree is out, the core-for-3.17 has the one 64-bit lun format
> string fix that didn't make it into the first pull request, the
> queuecommand device busy regression fix, and the cmd_pool fix.
> 
> The drivers-for-3.17 just has the driver updates I pushed earlier that
> didn't make the cut.

So this is a bit late to get through linux-next and into a pull request.
I was planning on sending the final pull tomorrow (in case Linus planned
a surprise early release).  Can we redo some of these as bug fixes and
send them in for -rc1?

James

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:47:08AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> So this is a bit late to get through linux-next and into a pull request.
> I was planning on sending the final pull tomorrow (in case Linus planned
> a surprise early release).  Can we redo some of these as bug fixes and
> send them in for -rc1?

core-for-3.17 is entirely bug fixes, the drivers side is all except
for 4 tiny patches, and even Linus isn't that anal I think.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[James Bottomley]

On Fri, 2014-08-15 at 12:25 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:47:08AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > So this is a bit late to get through linux-next and into a pull request.
> > I was planning on sending the final pull tomorrow (in case Linus planned
> > a surprise early release).  Can we redo some of these as bug fixes and
> > send them in for -rc1?
> 
> core-for-3.17 is entirely bug fixes, the drivers side is all except
> for 4 tiny patches, and even Linus isn't that anal I think.

You rebased the tree before doing it ... that's the one thing that
excites his process gene.  I can't send a rebased tree in on the last
day of merging.

I'll send in the unrebased tree which has been sitting in linux-next for
the past week.  The two additional changes in core-for-3.17 can be
picked out and sent as eligible bug fixes for -rc1.  The only addition
in drivers-for-3.17 is eata: remove driver_lock ... I'm in two minds
about whether we treat that as a bug fix or not.

James

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[adam radford]

On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 5:20 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> I've pushed out updates to both the core-for-3.17 and drivers-for-3.17
> branches.  I think we're in a good shape for the merge window, but
> I'd still like to get reviewers attention for a few driver updates that
> I'd love to get in still:
>
>  - my eata patch to remove the driver_lock
>  - the partially reviewed megaraid series

Christoph,

Can we get someone to finish reviewing the megaraid_sas patch series ?
 Or let me know if anything else needs to be corrected ?

I know it has been reviewed by yourself and Martin Petersen so far,
however, I could not find the patch series in:

http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git/shortlog/refs/heads/drivers-for-3.18

-Adam

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:33:17PM -0700, adam radford wrote:
> Can we get someone to finish reviewing the megaraid_sas patch series ?
>  Or let me know if anything else needs to be corrected ?
> 
> I know it has been reviewed by yourself and Martin Petersen so far,
> however, I could not find the patch series in:
> 
> http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git/shortlog/refs/heads/drivers-for-3.18

I think I'm missing an ACK from Martin on one of the patches. 

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Martin K. Petersen]

>>>>> "Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> writes:

Christoph> I think I'm missing an ACK from Martin on one of the patches.

Looks like I missed the updated version of these during my vacation.
I'll finish reviewing megaraid_sas (and mptNsas) today.

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Martin K. Petersen]

>>>>> "Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> writes:

Christoph> I think I'm missing an ACK from Martin on one of the patches.

3/5 and 4/5 look good to me.

Reviewed-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 04:26:09PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> Christoph> I think I'm missing an ACK from Martin on one of the patches.
> 
> 3/5 and 4/5 look good to me.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>

Thanks Martin,

I'll pull in the megaraid_sas patches for the next branch update.

[ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

Hi James,

I've pushed two updates to the core-for-3.17 branch of

    git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git

which should go to Linus before the next rc.

One is a regression fix for drivers using block layer tagging when
not using blk-mq introduced in the blk-mq series, and the other
fixes a potential buffer overrun in the iscsi initiator.

Updates of the for-3.18 trees will follow soon.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 03:58:18PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I've pushed two updates to the core-for-3.17 branch of
> 
>     git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git
> 
> which should go to Linus before the next rc.
> 
> One is a regression fix for drivers using block layer tagging when
> not using blk-mq introduced in the blk-mq series, and the other
> fixes a potential buffer overrun in the iscsi initiator.
> 
> Updates of the for-3.18 trees will follow soon.

core-for-3.17 has grown another fix from Daniel for bidi support.

core-for-3.18 has got the autopm fix to balance the calls and thus
	handle LUNs without attached ULD

drivers-for-3.18 has the megaraid, mpt and arcmsr updates as well as a
	bnx fix

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[James Bottomley]

On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 14:37 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 03:58:18PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > I've pushed two updates to the core-for-3.17 branch of
> > 
> >     git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git
> > 
> > which should go to Linus before the next rc.
> > 
> > One is a regression fix for drivers using block layer tagging when
> > not using blk-mq introduced in the blk-mq series, and the other
> > fixes a potential buffer overrun in the iscsi initiator.
> > 
> > Updates of the for-3.18 trees will follow soon.
> 
> core-for-3.17 has grown another fix from Daniel for bidi support.

OK, I've pushed this to -next.  If nothing bad turns up I'll send it to
Linus on Friday.

James

[ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

It turnd out while the scsi-queue tree in general worked very well
the split into core and drivers branches was rather cumbersome.

For the 3.19 merge window updates and the 3.20 window I've switched
to a single branch instead:

   git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git scsi-for-3.19
   git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git scsi-for-3.20

So far there 3.20 tree is still rather small, but there are a couple
of series that need a resend or review and should go in.

The rules from the original scsi-queue tree have worked well, so they
still apply with a minor change.  These rules are:

 - the patch needs at least two positive reviews (non-author signoff,
   reviewed-by or acked-by tags).   In practice this means it had at
   least one and I added another one.
   As an exception I also take trivial and important fixes if they
   only have a Tested-by: instead of a second review.
 - the patch has no negative review on the mailing list
 - the patch applies cleanly
 - the patch compiles (drivers for architectures I can't test excluded)
 - for core the core branch: the patch survives a full xfstests run

[ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

I've pushed out new version of the for-3.17 core and drivers trees:

  git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git core-for-3.17
  git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git drivers-for-3.17

In the core tree the biggest update is the merge of the blk-mq
support, but various smaller updates also made it.  On the drivers
side I have only merged minor updates for the ufs and hyperv drivers.

We're fairly late in the cycle but I really would like to not miss the
scsi_debug and megaraid updates that have been out for a while but need
another review.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree updated

[Christoph Hellwig]

I've pushed out new version of the for-3.17 core and drivers trees:

  git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git core-for-3.17
  git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/scsi-queue.git drivers-for-3.17

In the core tree the biggest update is the merge of the I/O path
cleanups, in addition various individual patches were merged, and
the a few fixes for the 64-bit LUN series were squashed into the
patches.

The drivers side gained various updates, but there's still lots of
driver work on the list that needs more reviews.

I did a rebase to Linus' latest tree to pick up the fix for the aio
regression to help people doing IOPS testing.

Note that I've also pushed out a core-for-3.16 tree with James' flush
fix in case James wants to push this for 3.16 still; but this late
in the release cycles it might be better to wait for 3.17 for this as
well.