public inbox for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/9] scsi: core: Call .eh_prepare_resubmit() before resubmitting
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2023 19:18:43 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <057e08f2-7349-bcad-c21d-11586c059fac@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <29cca660-4e66-002c-7378-2d2df5c79a08@kernel.org>

On 8/13/23 18:19, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 8/12/23 06:35, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> Make the error handler call .eh_prepare_resubmit() before resubmitting
> 
> This reads like the eh_prepare_resubmit callback already exists. But you are
> adding it. So you should state that.

Hi Damien,

I will rephrase the patch description.

>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/Makefile.kunit
>> @@ -0,0 +1 @@
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_SCSI_ERROR_TEST) += scsi_error_test.o
> 
> All the above kunit changes (and the test changes below) seem unrelated to what
> the commit message describes. Should these be split into a different patch ?

Some people insist on including unit tests in the same patch as
the patch that introduces the code that is being tested. I can
move the unit test into a separate patch if that is preferred.

>> +	/*
>> +	 * Call .eh_prepare_resubmit for each range of commands with identical
>> +	 * ULD driver pointer.
>> +	 */
>> +	list_for_each_entry_safe(scmd, next, done_q, eh_entry) {
>> +		struct scsi_driver *uld = scsi_cmd_to_driver(scmd);
>> +		struct list_head *prev, uld_cmd_list;
>> +
>> +		while (&next->eh_entry != done_q &&
>> +		       scsi_cmd_to_driver(next) == uld)
>> +			next = list_next_entry(next, eh_entry);
>> +		if (!uld->eh_prepare_resubmit)
>> +			continue;
>> +		prev = scmd->eh_entry.prev;
>> +		list_cut_position(&uld_cmd_list, prev, next->eh_entry.prev);
>> +		uld->eh_prepare_resubmit(&uld_cmd_list);
> 
> Is it guaranteed that all uld implement eh_prepare_resubmit ?

That is not guaranteed. Hence the if (!uld->eh_prepare_resubmit)
test in the above loop.

Thanks,

Bart.

  reply	other threads:[~2023-08-14  2:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-08-11 21:35 [PATCH v8 0/9] Improve performance for zoned UFS devices Bart Van Assche
2023-08-11 21:35 ` [PATCH v8 1/9] block: Introduce more member variables related to zone write locking Bart Van Assche
2023-08-14 12:32   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-08-14 16:57     ` Bart Van Assche
2023-08-15  2:01       ` Damien Le Moal
2023-08-15 16:06         ` Bart Van Assche
2023-08-11 21:35 ` [PATCH v8 2/9] block/mq-deadline: Only use zone locking if necessary Bart Van Assche
2023-08-14 12:33   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-08-14 17:00     ` Bart Van Assche
2023-08-15  1:57       ` Damien Le Moal
2023-08-11 21:35 ` [PATCH v8 3/9] scsi: core: Call .eh_prepare_resubmit() before resubmitting Bart Van Assche
2023-08-14  1:19   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-08-14  2:18     ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2023-08-14  2:41       ` Damien Le Moal
2023-08-14  3:23         ` Bart Van Assche
2023-08-14  4:18           ` Damien Le Moal
2023-08-14 17:52             ` Bart Van Assche
2023-08-11 21:35 ` [PATCH v8 4/9] scsi: sd: Sort commands by LBA " Bart Van Assche
2023-08-11 21:35 ` [PATCH v8 5/9] scsi: core: Retry unaligned zoned writes Bart Van Assche
2023-08-14 12:36   ` Damien Le Moal
2023-08-14 17:57     ` Bart Van Assche
2023-08-15  1:52       ` Damien Le Moal
2023-08-15 17:29     ` Bart Van Assche
2023-08-16  1:13       ` Damien Le Moal
2023-08-16 19:59         ` Bart Van Assche
2023-08-11 21:35 ` [PATCH v8 6/9] scsi: scsi_debug: Support disabling zone write locking Bart Van Assche
2023-08-11 21:35 ` [PATCH v8 7/9] scsi: scsi_debug: Support injecting unaligned write errors Bart Van Assche
2023-08-11 21:35 ` [PATCH v8 8/9] scsi: ufs: Split an if-condition Bart Van Assche
2023-08-11 21:35 ` [PATCH v8 9/9] scsi: ufs: Inform the block layer about write ordering Bart Van Assche
2023-08-12 17:09   ` Bao D. Nguyen
2023-08-14 16:23     ` Bart Van Assche
2023-08-15  3:20       ` Bao D. Nguyen
2023-08-15 15:41         ` Bart Van Assche

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=057e08f2-7349-bcad-c21d-11586c059fac@acm.org \
    --to=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.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