Bugzilla – Bug 129206
LTC19050-lpfc driver finds only LUN 0 on multi LUN storage targets
Last modified: 2016-02-13 06:05:22 UTC
LTC Owner is: gjlynx@us.ibm.com LTC Originator is: rlary@us.ibm.com Problem description: Emulex lpfc driver finds only LUN0 on multi LUN storage systems. If this is a customer issue, please indicate the impact to the customer: If this is not an installation problem, Describe any custom patches installed. Provide output from "uname -a", if possible: Open SuSE 10.1 Alpha 2.6.13.2-2-ppc64 #1 SMP Mon Sep 26 14:25:33 UTC 2005 ppc64 ppc64 ppc64 GNU/Linux Hardware Environment Machine type (p650, x235, SF2, etc.): SF2 Cpu type (Power4, Power5, IA-64, etc.): Power5 Describe any special hardware you think might be relevant to this problem: 2 Emulex LP9802 2Gb HBA, 2 Emulex LP11000 4Gb HBA, FAStT DS700 storage Please provide contact information if the submitter is not the primary contact. Please provide access information for the machine if it is available. Is this reproducible? If so, how long does it (did it) take to reproduce it? Describe the steps: Boot system with storage configured with 8 LUNS per HBA. Observe that only LUN0 of each storage system is mapped to sg device. If not, describe how the bug was encountered: Is the system (not just the application) hung? If so, describe how you determined this: Did the system produce an OOPS message on the console? If so, copy it here: Is the system sitting in a debugger right now? If so, how long may it stay there? Additional information: This bug was not present in 2.6.13-rc7 kernel with 8.0.30 version of Emulex lpfc driver. Created mirror request (id=4806)Novell Bugzilla This was requested last week, a little delay in getting it mirrored over, but here it is....
you could try 2.6.14-rc4-git$latest, its likely already fixed. but we did not move up to 2.6.14 for the next OSS snapshot. I will try it myself once our console server is back.
I bootet 2.6.14-rc5 and this one shows all luns. I cant boot 2.6.13 on this RS64 box, so I cant verify if the problem did exist there. Please retry the current kernel of the day, it is supposed to boot. reopen this bug on our side if that kernel still doesnt work.