From: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
To: "Salyzyn, Mark" <Mark_Salyzyn@adaptec.com>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/24][RFC] dpt_i2o: Use new scsi_eh_cpy_sense()
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 10:51:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47A823A2.6090200@panasas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <532ABFBDAAC3A34EB12EBA6CEC2838F439766174@ADPE2K703.adaptec.com>
On Mon, Feb 04 2008 at 20:32 +0200, "Salyzyn, Mark" <Mark_Salyzyn@adaptec.com> wrote:
> ACK with condition that community accepts the RFC's entire premise.
>
> The removed code that shunted the REQUEST_SENSE was based on the assumption
> that the sense data in the current scsi command packet was left over from the
> previous command's execution with a check condition as the scsi command packet
> is reused to issue the REQUEST_SENSE. For a new, or second from the target's point
> of view, request sense to the target issued by these older kernels would always
> return an erased sense. The dpt_i2o driver does not itself maintain the sense history,
> nor does the Firmware. This behavior, I believe, is not the case for current kernels so
> the code fragment made little sense (pun not intended). If my historical knowledge is
> correct, this (now removed) workaround makes no more sense because the scsi layer correctly
> manages adapters that produce auto-request sense and does not ever turn around the command
> and send a second request for sense information.
> Given this understanding, I have no problem with the removed fragment of REQUEST_SENSE shunting.
> However, I do urge some target error recovery testing, tape drives being the likely type of target
> affected by this change. I have no such hardware to confirm...
> Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn
I have removed this test because the midlayer does a scsi_eh_reset_sense() just before
the new invocation of a command. So even if the second bad REQUEST_SENSE comes this
will not filter it out anymore. If such a thing still happens? A driver state machine
must be used to filter it out, or of course midlayer should be fixed.
Boaz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-05 8:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-04 15:58 [PATCH 5/24][RFC] dpt_i2o: Use new scsi_eh_cpy_sense() Boaz Harrosh
2008-02-04 18:32 ` Salyzyn, Mark
2008-02-05 8:51 ` Boaz Harrosh [this message]
2008-02-05 13:51 ` Salyzyn, Mark
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=47A823A2.6090200@panasas.com \
--to=bharrosh@panasas.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=Mark_Salyzyn@adaptec.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.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.