From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: James.Smart@Emulex.Com
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] updated: suspending I/Os to a device
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:11:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040811231137.A1038@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0B1E13B586976742A7599D71A6AC733C02D7D3@xbl3.ma.emulex.com>; from James.Smart@Emulex.Com on Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 05:00:40PM -0400
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 05:00:40PM -0400, James.Smart@Emulex.Com wrote:
> Well - it's not necessarily fc-specific, as I would assume USB, iSCSI, etc also would like to do the same thing. But, as far as just putting it in the device structure - I had the same thoughts. One thing that influenced this was JamesB's comments on not wanting all devices to have the structure, just those being on LLDD's that need to deal with this. Note - "recovery" as a name was just randomly picked based on this 1 element. Are there perhaps other things that may fit this same definition (cross transport, but optional) ? If so - is it better to rename this template ?
I don't like the complexitly this adds and would prefer it in scsi_device
over this. Seems like James and me disagree on this.
> Also - does it really make sense to have the midlayer own the timer and calling cancel when it expires ? Or is it better to have the LLDD own it, calling continue when it expires, and letting the subsequent i/o failures take the device offline ? The midlayer owning the timer seems more protectionist, but is it better ?
Sounds like we could start by having this in the driver and when we see that
lots of drivers use it we can still move it to the midlayer.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-11 22:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-10 21:00 [PATCH] updated: suspending I/Os to a device James.Smart
2004-08-11 22:11 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-09-01 19:30 James.Smart
2004-09-01 19:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-08-20 13:24 James.Smart
2004-08-19 18:24 James.Smart
2004-08-20 8:55 ` Mike Anderson
2004-08-20 13:48 ` Luben Tuikov
2004-08-19 17:24 James.Smart
2004-08-19 17:42 ` James Bottomley
2004-08-10 20:35 James.Smart
2004-08-10 20:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-08-17 4:39 ` James Bottomley
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=20040811231137.A1038@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=James.Smart@Emulex.Com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.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.