All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: dgilbert@interlog.com,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Dave Jones <dsj@fb.com>,
	kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: don't count non-failure CHECK_CONDITION as error
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 11:36:08 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1452886568.2356.23.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160115192755.GK3520@mtj.duckdns.org>

On Fri, 2016-01-15 at 14:27 -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, James.
> 
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:09:16AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> > If we want to change what is being counted, we have to change the
> > definition, so what is the definition you want to see for counting
> > errors? and what's the reason driving this change?
> 
> There isn't anything else to it than what I already wrote.  It goes
> up
> for things which aren't failures making the counter essentially
> useless.  It's confusing from userland as it's unintuitive that these
> commands are wrapped in SCSI ATA passthrough commands which use sense
> data for result reporting and doing equivalent operations on native
> SCSI and ATA devices lead to different outcomes.  The counter as-is
> is
> just useless for libata devices.  If it can be rectified easily,
> great.  If not, it isn't anything critical.

That's the point we were making: it can't be rectified easily.  Simply
counting non-good returns is easy.  Counting something that's closer to
errors is hard because first we have to define what an "error" is (I
could see queue full being not an error, but what about not ready or
initializing command required?) and then implement and infrastructure
to classify and count the returns, which means an awful lot of sense
data parsing.

James


  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-15 19:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-01-14 21:46 [PATCH] scsi: don't count non-failure CHECK_CONDITION as error Tejun Heo
2016-01-14 21:49 ` [PATCH REPOST] " Tejun Heo
2016-01-15 10:04 ` [PATCH] " Hannes Reinecke
2016-01-15 15:46 ` James Bottomley
2016-01-15 15:55   ` James Bottomley
2016-01-15 16:50     ` Douglas Gilbert
2016-01-15 18:35       ` James Bottomley
2016-01-15 18:42         ` Tejun Heo
2016-01-15 19:09           ` James Bottomley
2016-01-15 19:27             ` Tejun Heo
2016-01-15 19:36               ` James Bottomley [this message]
2016-01-15 19:40                 ` Tejun Heo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1452886568.2356.23.camel@HansenPartnership.com \
    --to=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=dgilbert@interlog.com \
    --cc=dsj@fb.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.