[Open-FCoE] [RFC PATCH v2 0/8] adding support to FCoE transport

Zou, Yi yi.zou at intel.com
Tue Jan 11 19:55:36 UTC 2011


> On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 17:33 -0800, Bhanu Gollapudi wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 09:42 -0800, Yi Zou wrote:
> > > This is the RFC v2 of adding fcoe transport to support vendor
> specific FCoE
> > > transport into the existing Open-FCoE framework.
> > >
> > > v1:
> > > Initial post for adding fcoe transport:
> > > https://lists.open-fcoe.org/pipermail/devel/2010-December/010865.html
> > > Follow-up comments & discussions:
> > > https://lists.open-fcoe.org/pipermail/devel/2011-January/010890.html
> > >
> > > v2:
> > > 1. Per Joe's comment, renamed the libfcoe_fip.c to be fcoe_ctlr.c. I
> > > also renamed the new ibfcoe_transport.c to be fcoe_transport.c.
> > > 2. Per Bhanu's comment, I have merged the three follow-up patches
> > > from Bhanu with the following changes in fcoe_parse_buffer():
> > > a) Though not a problem of the existing fcoe-util since the sysfs
> > > entry is changing to libfcoe anyway, I still want to fill the buffer
> > > of drv_name with default "fcoe" so default behavior is still the same
> > > w/o changing cfg-ethx.
> > > b) Fixed the '\n' ending in the input buffer in fcoe_parse_buffer, we
> still
> > > need that proper formatting logic from the original
> fcoe_if_to_netdev(),
> > > otherwise the ifname and drv_name will be messed up, causing the
> lookup for
> > > netdev and transport to fail.
> > >
> > > Testing Notes:
> > > Did the checkpatch and tested w/ overnight stress FCoE traffic on 2
> LUNs using
> > > fcoe.ko as the default fcoe transport, that seems to be working ok.
> However,
> > > loop create/destroy testing is needed before this gets committed
> eventually.
> >
> > Thanks Yi. bnx2fc patches got installed cleanly on top of your patches,
> > and we were able run FCoE IO traffic, and will leave it running for the
> > weekend.
> 
> Just to confirm IO stress tests over the weekend were successful.  I
> submitted a couple of follow-up patches w.r.t ERESTARTSYS.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bhanu
> 
The follow-up patches look good to me, I'll pull your 1/3 and 2/3 in and
add them to the bottom of the original series, and do some more testing on
loop create/destroy, I only have fcoe as the default transport, it'll be
good if you can run the same test for both fcoe.ko as well as your bnx2fc
at the same time.

Thanks,
yi






More information about the devel mailing list