From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hannes Reinecke Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] scsi_transport_fc: FC timeout handler Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 11:38:55 +0200 Message-ID: <51A086AF.5050609@suse.de> References: <1369389050-118628-1-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> <1369389050-118628-5-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> <20130525050842.GA6973@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:52222 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753107Ab3EYIjE (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 May 2013 04:39:04 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130525050842.GA6973@infradead.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Ewan Milne , James Smart , Bryn Reeves , Roland Dreier On 05/25/2013 07:08 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > This looks like a good start, but why would we make this FC specific? > Because James B. said so :-) No, seriously: You would need to revisit the good old SCSI parallel LLDDs to figure out if this approach works for them. Eg aic7xxx basically has to stop the entire HBA even for an abort as it has to look through its internal queues etc to locate the command. So for them it wouldn't make much difference. Plus no-one has the knowledge nor the equipment to check _all_ SPI LLDDs to ensure this will work for them. Cheers, Hannes