From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luben Tuikov Subject: Re: Report luns Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:13:34 -0500 Message-ID: <4192220E.80805@adaptec.com> References: <20041028143734.GA16358@beaverton.ibm.com> <20041028153522.GC1915@astral.ro> <20041028164210.GA16905@beaverton.ibm.com> <20041028172143.GA20949@praka.san.rr.com> <20041029085800.GF6671@astral.ro> <20041029180633.GA27267@beaverton.ibm.com> <20041101105611.GJ22603@astral.ro> <20041101194845.GA27913@us.ibm.com> <41903031.3050205@torque.net> <4190DCE0.1070606@adaptec.com> <20041109211055.GA11459@us.ibm.com> <41919D7B.5040703@torque.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from magic.adaptec.com ([216.52.22.17]:45442 "EHLO magic.adaptec.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261987AbUKJONx (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:13:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: <41919D7B.5040703@torque.net> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: dougg@torque.net Cc: Patrick Mansfield , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Douglas Gilbert wrote: > > So now if one sends a REPORT LUNS to lun 0 that U320 disk is > expected to know about its sibling disks!? That is why I used > the term "hack" with respect to lun 0. What really happens > is the device server in the bridge intercepts the REPORT LUNS > command and produces a response reflecting its knowledge of > those 5 U320 disks present. Why play this game? Why not talk > directly to the device server (addressed via a well known lu). > This way an INQUIRY to a W-LUN yields information about > the bridge, while an INQUIRY to lun 0 yields information about > that disk. Very good point! So we can reverse the logic into sending REPORT LUNS to the REPORT LUNS W-LUN *first* and if this fails (most probably in early years), then issue REPORT LUNS to LUN 0. Luben