From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luben Tuikov Subject: Re: [RFC] libata new EH document Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:36:49 -0400 Message-ID: <43178281.20203@adaptec.com> References: <20050901043850.15186.qmail@web51611.mail.yahoo.com> <43169520.6040008@gmail.com> <20050901055421.GA23496@havoc.gtf.org> <1125581097.4834.5.camel@mulgrave> <4317755C.5080700@adaptec.com> <1125611718.4946.20.camel@mulgrave> <43177B95.4040602@adaptec.com> <1125613408.4946.28.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1125613408.4946.28.camel@mulgrave> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: Jeff Garzik , Tejun Heo , ltuikov@yahoo.com, Albert Lee , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, SCSI Mailing List , Doug Maxey List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On 09/01/05 18:23, James Bottomley wrote: > On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 18:07 -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote: > >>>Well, not really, since it's basic SCSI and the explanation's pretty >>>long. However, the standards have several pages about it. For your >>>reading pleasure, I suggest SAM-2 section 5.9.1 Contingent allegiance >>>(CA) and auto contingent allegiance (ACA) >> >>SCSI Core knows nothing about ACA and/or how to use it. > > > I don't recall ever claiming that it did. The discussion was about how > the error handler clears contingent allegiance conditions. :-) So are you claiming that "the error handler clears contingent allegiance conditions" ? Please point me to the lines in the source code where it does this and how it does it. >>You should also know that no one actually spells out CA or ACA, >>they just use the capitalized abbreviation, plus the fact that >>CA is obsolete. > > > Lets just say I'm TLA averse. > > >>Stop impressing the children! > > > Is that what people who constantly refer to standards are trying to do? > I must say I did wonder ... Yes, there's a bunch of us here, count DG too. Luben