From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi_lib.c: continue after MEDIUM_ERROR Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 12:13:18 -0600 Message-ID: <1170267198.3402.58.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> References: <200701301947.08478.liml@rtr.ca> <1170206199.10890.13.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> <311601c90701301725n53d25a74g652b7ca3bfc64c56@mail.gmail.com> <45BFF3D6.9050605@rtr.ca> <45C00AEE.1090708@emc.com> <45C0B0DC.8030501@rtr.ca> <20070131152301.19a8a5ac@localhost.localdomain> <45C0D8A1.2030506@rtr.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <45C0D8A1.2030506@rtr.ca> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Lord Cc: Alan , Ric Wheeler , "Eric D. Mudama" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, IDE/ATA development list , linux-scsi , dougg@torque.net List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 12:57 -0500, Mark Lord wrote: > Alan wrote: > >> When libata reports a MEDIUM_ERROR to us, we *know* it's non-recoverable, > >> as the drive itself has already done internal retries (libata uses the > >> "with retry" ATA opcodes for this). > > > > This depends on the firmware. Some of the "raid firmware" drives don't > > appear to do retries in firmware. > > One way to tell if this is true, is simply to time how long > the failed operation takes. If the drive truly does not do retries, > then the media error should be reported more or less instantly > (assuming drive was already spun up). Well, the simpler way (and one we have a hope of implementing) is to examine the ASC/ASCQ codes to see if the error is genuinely unretryable. I seem to have dropped the ball on this one in that the scsi_error.c pieces of this patch http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=116485834119885 I thought I'd applied. Apparently I didn't, so I'll go back and put them in. James