From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ewan Milne Subject: Re: Error handling on FC devices Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 15:03:21 -0500 Message-ID: <1354046601.4420.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <50AA290F.8000105@suse.de> <50B3EDEA.40008@emulex.com> Reply-To: emilne@redhat.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9288 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754601Ab2K0UEI (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Nov 2012 15:04:08 -0500 In-Reply-To: <50B3EDEA.40008@emulex.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James.Smart@emulex.com Cc: Hannes Reinecke , SCSI Mailing List , Andrew Vasquez , Chad Dupuis , James Bottomley On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 17:32 -0500, James Smart wrote: > Given path switching is somewhat separate from the i/o, would it better > to send a notification of a path-fail condition as part of the eh, > rather than hinging it on the individual i/o. Yes, the i/o is still in > limbo and can't be switched to the new path, but other i/o could without > incurring the delay. Is there a potential issue with a write that is taking a long time on one path, which could cause path switching for subsequent writes to another path, before the disposition of the first write is known?