From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] scsi: improved eh timeout handler Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 19:24:47 -0400 Message-ID: <20130610232446.GD18076@logfs.org> References: <1370850058-27613-1-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> <1370850058-27613-4-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> <20130610082001.GB7816@infradead.org> <51B595C1.8040106@suse.de> <20130610151916.GA18076@logfs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from longford.logfs.org ([213.229.74.203]:59521 "EHLO longford.logfs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752084Ab3FKAyS (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jun 2013 20:54:18 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130610151916.GA18076@logfs.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Hannes Reinecke Cc: Christoph Hellwig , James Bottomley , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Ewan Milne , James Smart , Ren Mingxin , Roland Dreier , Bryn Reeves On Mon, 10 June 2013 11:19:16 -0400, J=C3=B6rn Engel wrote: >=20 > I don't care too much whether we use per-command work items or a > single system-global thread. Actually, I do care. We have to abort the commands in parallel, as a fairly large number of abort can queue up and individual aborts can take 20s on hardware I care about. 20s for an abort is pretty bad, but given today's reality there is no need to make things worse by serializing. J=C3=B6rn -- A defeated army first battles and then seeks victory. -- Sun Tzu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html