From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King Subject: Re: SCSI woes (followup) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:41:54 +0100 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20020925154153.A8733@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20020924233941.A9952@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <200209242314.g8ONEHU02783@localhost.localdomain> <20020924232630.GD1330@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 17uDMQ-0004Ig-00 for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:41:55 +0100 Received: from rmk by flint.arm.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.04) id 17uDMQ-0002gl-00 for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:41:54 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020924232630.GD1330@beaverton.ibm.com>; from andmike@us.ibm.com on Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 04:26:30PM -0700 List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 04:26:30PM -0700, Mike Anderson wrote: > James Bottomley [James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com] wrote: > > send it off to Marcelo and I'll try to up-port to 2.5 > > If you want me to I can add it to a patch bundle I already have that > includes ports of Russell's previous changes that apply on top of my > 2.5 scsi_error cleanup patch. It'll probably be better to wait for me to say "ok, I'm happy, and sending the stuff" before doing that. I've just re-diffed and cleaned up all my scsi patches to date, and split them up into logical blocks: 01-scsi-cmd-retry-1.diff 01-scsi-cmd-retry-2.diff 01-scsi-cmd-retry-3.diff 02-scsi-cmd-report.diff 03-scsi-restart-ops.diff 04-scsi-door-lock-1.diff 04-scsi-door-lock-2.diff I've updated the command retry patches to catch a couple of re-setup places I'd missed in scsi_error.c. I've also incorporated Patricks concern about breaking out of the restart loop when we hit a device with the "device_blocked" flag set. In this case, I think we should still call the request function; the request function performs its own "device blocked" check, so putting such a check here would just be a needless duplicate. I'll put the patches up on ftp.linux.org.uk later today. I'll also be asking Alan Cox at some point in the future if he'd mind dropping them into his tree for further testing, before sending them to Marcelo. (Oh, and in case anyone hasn't realised yet, I'm not on linux-scsi.) -- Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html