<div dir="ltr"><div>Thanks.</div>Patch pushed.</div><div class="gmail_extra"> <div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Hannes Reinecke <<a href="mailto:hare@suse.de" target="_blank">hare@suse.de</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 10/03/2016 01:02 PM, Christophe Varoqui wrote: > Hi Xose, > > Group by serial sure can make sense for hardware not capable of multibus. > > Can you or Hannes (listed as maintainer for IBM) confirm the concerned > IBM arrays are multibus capable ? > > Best regards, > Christophe Varoqui > OpenSVC > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez > <<a href="mailto:xose.vazquez@gmail.com">xose.vazquez@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:xose.vazquez@gmail.com">xose.vazquez@gmail.com</a>>> wrote: > > It doesn't make any sense to have, by default, GROUP_BY_SERIAL in > real hardware. > > Cc: Hannes Reinecke <<a href="mailto:hare@suse.de">hare@suse.de</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:hare@suse.de">hare@suse.de</a>>> > Cc: Christophe Varoqui <<a href="mailto:christophe.varoqui@opensvc.com">christophe.varoqui@opensvc.com</a> > <mailto:<a href="mailto:christophe.varoqui@opensvc.com">christophe.varoqui@opensvc.com</a>>> > Cc: device-mapper development <<a href="mailto:dm-devel@redhat.com">dm-devel@redhat.com</a> > <mailto:<a href="mailto:dm-devel@redhat.com">dm-devel@redhat.com</a>>> > Signed-off-by: Xose Vazquez Perez <<a href="mailto:xose.vazquez@gmail.com">xose.vazquez@gmail.com</a> > <mailto:<a href="mailto:xose.vazquez@gmail.com">xose.vazquez@gmail.com</a>>> > --- > libmultipath/hwtable.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/libmultipath/hwtable.c b/libmultipath/hwtable.c > index aa3ea9b..72b5e1d 100644 > --- a/libmultipath/hwtable.c > +++ b/libmultipath/hwtable.c > @@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ static struct hwentry default_hw[] = { > /* DS4200 / FAStT200 */ > .vendor = "IBM", > .product = "^3542", > - .pgpolicy = GROUP_BY_SERIAL, > + .pgpolicy = MULTIBUS, > .pgfailback = FAILBACK_UNDEF, > }, This is the IBM FAStT 200, which is IIRC an RDAC machine. So multibus will be wrong here, and it should be using the RDAC entry instead. > { > @@ -451,7 +451,7 @@ static struct hwentry default_hw[] = { > .vendor = "IBM", > .product = "^2105", > .no_path_retry = NO_PATH_RETRY_QUEUE, > - .pgpolicy = GROUP_BY_SERIAL, > + .pgpolicy = MULTIBUS, > .pgfailback = FAILBACK_UNDEF, > }, > { That's the old IBM ESS 800; this is a fully symmetric active-active array. So yes, multibus is correct here. Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage <a href="mailto:hare@suse.de">hare@suse.de</a> <a href="tel:%2B49%20911%2074053%20688" value="+4991174053688">+49 911 74053 688</a> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: J. Hawn, J. Guild, F. Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) </blockquote></div> </div>