From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Flexible timeout infrastructure Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:57:16 +0100 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040615155716.GA14017@infradead.org> References: <40CF0F9F.4050902@adaptec.com> <1087313241.2710.40.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> <40CF1852.6030306@adaptec.com> <20040615154313.GA25397@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <40CF1A5D.30908@adaptec.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from [213.146.154.40] ([213.146.154.40]:14464 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265716AbUFOP5S (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jun 2004 11:57:18 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40CF1A5D.30908@adaptec.com> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Luben Tuikov Cc: Arjan van de Ven , SCSI Mailing List On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 11:48:45AM -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote: > This really isn't anything new or paramount. It's just a simple > extension, marked OPTIONAL, that only *capable* drivers should use. > (i.e. the aic7xxx drivers, maybe some FC and USB). > > So it's not really that big of a deal, but does wonders to > SCSI Core in terms of recovery time and *uninterruptible* > IO. Well, the question is always what is so special about your driver that it doesn't benefit from beeing in a common library. I've pulled more crap out of individual drivers than I'd ever want to imagine, and because of that I'm pretty much allergic against giving driver writers more control then nessecary.