From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Justin T. Gibbs" Subject: Re: aic7xxx sets CDR offline, how to reset? Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 18:13:45 -0600 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <100360000.1031271224@aslan.btc.adaptec.com> References: <200209041613.g84GDtv02639@localhost.localdomain> <12750000.1031158209@aslan.btc.adaptec.com> <10209050239.ZM52086@classic.engr.sgi.com> <122900000.1031232923@aslan.scsiguy.com> <10209051656.ZM53302@classic.engr.sgi.com> Reply-To: "Justin T. Gibbs" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <10209051656.ZM53302@classic.engr.sgi.com> Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Jeremy Higdon , James Bottomley , Alan Cox , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org > But don't the controllers have to know which commands have been silently > aborted by the target? The controller drivers would need to know that the QErr policy is in effect for a given device. With that knowledge, the book keeping from the controller's standpoint is really quite simple and no different than if a lun reset, target reset, clear task set, bus reset or any other task management function is executed. In other words, the controller drivers already need to understand the consequences of such events. > There are various resources allocated to a > command, so if the command will never be completed, as a result of some > other command getting "check condition", the controller would have to > know. The controller knows which commands are affected and just returns them to the mid-layer with the appropriate error code. > Or are you suggesting that the type drivers would tell the controllers to > release those resources? Not necessary. > And would this change if the controller drivers were keeping track of > timeouts, etc.? This all assumes that the controllers are doing watchdog recovery. -- Justin