From: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
To: Patrick Mansfield <patmans@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Luben Tuikov <ltuikov@yahoo.com>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
hch@lst.de, James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com,
alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, albertcc@tw.ibm.com,
arjan@infradead.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] SCSI: implement scsi_eh_schedule_cmd()
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 14:32:14 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <443DE25E.90905@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060412161842.GA19787@us.ibm.com>
Hello, Luben, Patrick.
Patrick Mansfield wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 01:24:42AM -0700, Luben Tuikov wrote:
>> --- Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Patrick Mansfield wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 01:41:57PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>>>> Tejun Heo wrote:
>
>>>>>> +int scsi_eh_schedule_cmd(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd)
>
>>>> Per other email it should be called scsi_req_abort_cmd() or such, as that
>>>> is the only reason to call it, correct?
>>> Well, it's named this way is to keep it consistent with
>>> scsi_eh_schedule_host(). Either name is okay with me but driver which
>>> use this function probably have interest in schedule_host() but not in
>>> other SCSI EH functions. So, considering that, I think the current
>>> naming is okay.
>> Tejun, note that scsi_req_abort_cmd() absolves your patch.
>> I think this is what Pat is trying to say. I.e. it is much
>> more general and thus applies to more applications (as in uses).
>> Plus it is shorter, simpler (3 lines) and more straightforward.
Yeap, I kind of misunderstood Patrick's mail. scsi_req_abort_cmd() is
good but...
* The event is not really a timeout. It shouldn't be logged as
TIMEOUT_ERROR or completed with DID_TIME_OUT when add_scmd fails.
* Similarly, I don't think it's a good idea to call ->eh_timed_out() on
explicit command abort. If something common has to be done, it's better
to make a function for that can calling the function from both
->eh_timed_out() and after scsi_req_abort_cmd() succeeds. Otherwise,
libata has to decide whether ->eh_timed_out() is called from real
timeout or explicit abortion and skip timeout processing for explicit
abortions.
* I don't really understand what you mean by saying scsi_req_abort_cmd()
is more generic. If it means the WARN_ON(!->eh_strategy_handler) part.
That's just a safety net as standard SCSI doesn't know what to do with
commands directly aborted by LLDD. If it's something else, please
elaborate.
> Both implementations work ... really I'd prefer a scsi_times_out() and
> scsi_abort_cmd() that call a __scsi_abort_cmd().
__scsi_abort_cmd() would just contain scmd_add, I think.
> If we implement them right, in the future those simple interfaces can stay
> the same even if we no longer have to invoke eh to abort a command.
>
>> So, scsi_eh_reschedule_host() is equivalent to simply scsi_req_abort_cmd(cmd)
>> xor scsi_req_dev_reset(dev), the latter in case you want to notify without
>> piggybacking on a command.
Can you please post the patch for scsi_req_dev_reset()? One thing to
note is that libata might not have sdev to call that function with when
it wants to invoke EH for hotplug.
>> Also, your routine calls more specific eh routines and you should try
>> to be more general.
Please, elaborate.
>>>> Any other handling can be completed by calling the ->done function.
>>>>
>>>> Even the abort/cancel could be done in the driver without this, I assume
>>>> it is avaiable so the driver can use the eh process and existing code
>>>> paths rather than duplicate similar code.
>>> Yeap, as I noted earlier, passing scmds to EH is possible without this
>>> function but it has to be done in a quite hackish way. My earlier
>
> I didn't mean pass them to eh, I mean the driver or transport could have
> its own work queue (or not ... we don't need a work queue or process
> context to send commands, scsi core sends commands without a work queue or
> process context), and issue the abort. Then on completion set error to
> DID_TIME_OUT (or whatever makes sense) and call the ->done function.
>
> We should move towards driver/transport supplied eh, that is invoked by
> the driver/transport specific code, not (possibly) by a single timeout. I
> thought this was the direction everyone wanted to go.
I think it's good have some infrastructure in SCSI. e.g. libata can do
everything itself but it's just nice to have SCSI EH infrastructure to
build upon (EH thread, scmd draining & plugging...).
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-13 5:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-01 10:38 [PATCH] SCSI: implement scsi_eh_schedule() Tejun Heo
2006-04-01 20:14 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-04-02 1:15 ` Tejun Heo
2006-04-02 16:04 ` [PATCH 1/2] SCSI: implement scsi_eh_schedule_cmd() Tejun Heo
2006-04-02 16:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] SCSI: implement scsi_eh_schedule_host() Tejun Heo
2006-04-11 17:43 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-04-02 23:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] SCSI: implement scsi_eh_schedule_cmd() Luben Tuikov
2006-04-03 1:24 ` Tejun Heo
2006-04-11 17:41 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-04-11 21:28 ` Patrick Mansfield
2006-04-12 2:21 ` Tejun Heo
2006-04-12 8:24 ` Luben Tuikov
2006-04-12 16:18 ` Patrick Mansfield
2006-04-13 5:32 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2006-04-14 8:49 ` Luben Tuikov
2006-04-14 12:02 ` Tejun Heo
2006-04-19 18:49 ` Luben Tuikov
2006-04-20 2:07 ` Tejun Heo
2006-04-20 13:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-04-21 2:22 ` Tejun Heo
2006-04-20 19:23 ` Luben Tuikov
2006-04-21 2:39 ` Tejun Heo
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=443DE25E.90905@gmail.com \
--to=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=albertcc@tw.ibm.com \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltuikov@yahoo.com \
--cc=patmans@us.ibm.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).