From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King Subject: Re: SCSI woes (followup) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:45:51 +0100 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20020925094551.B24532@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20020924233941.A9952@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <200209242314.g8ONEHU02783@localhost.localdomain> <20020924232630.GD1330@beaverton.ibm.com> <20020925003335.D9952@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20020925004737.GC12650@beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from flint.arm.linux.org.uk ([3ffe:8260:2002:1:201:2ff:fe14:8fad]) by caramon.arm.linux.org.uk with asmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.04) id 17u7ns-00032H-00 for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:45:52 +0100 Received: from rmk by flint.arm.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.04) id 17u7nr-0006Uu-00 for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:45:51 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020925004737.GC12650@beaverton.ibm.com>; from andmike@us.ibm.com on Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 05:47:38PM -0700 List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 05:47:38PM -0700, Mike Anderson wrote: > I will try to post my update tomorrow, but it will not mean much to 2.4 > as it is on top of the 2.5 cleanup which is very different from 2.4. Nevertheless, bounding those retries in 2.4 is a must for stability. Loops that could become infinite one day almost certainly will at some point. I think the SCSI subsystem has proven this point in the past. 8/ I've also spotted a few other places that could do with my "restore Scsi_Cmnd to pristine state after error handling commands have completed" cleanup in scsi_error.c to ensure that we restore everything necessary. I'm putting that at low priority at the moment though. -- Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html