From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ren Mingxin Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] New FC timeout handler Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 16:37:39 +0800 Message-ID: <51A70FD3.90908@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <1369389050-118628-1-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:11797 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S967252Ab3E3JF3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 May 2013 05:05:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1369389050-118628-1-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Hannes Reinecke Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Ewan Milne , James Smart , Bryn Reeves , Roland Dreier , Christoph Hellwig Hi, Hannes: On 05/24/2013 05:50 PM, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > this is the first step towards a new FC error handler. > This patch implements a new FC command timeout handler > which will be sending command aborts inline without > engaging SCSI EH. > > In addition the commands will be returned directly > if the command abort succeeded, cutting down recovery > times dramatically. To the commands which can be aborted successfully, I guess your patchset has solved the problem "the error handler can't even be called until host_failed == host_busy", because it needn't to wait for the scheduling of EH threads(without engaging SCSI EH as you said) now, right? > For any other return code from 'eh_abort_handler' the command > will be pushed onto the existing SCSI EH handler, or aborted > with an error if that fails. To the commands which can NOT be aborted successfully, there is not any improvements for the SCSI EH will be invoked as usual. But should we consider the repetitive/time-consuming issue for the commands will be tried to abort again in the SCSI EH handler? Thanks, Ren