public inbox for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>
To: Lan Tran <transter@gmail.com>
Cc: Douglas Gilbert <dougg@torque.net>,
	"Qi, Yanling" <yanling.qi@engenio.com>, Dave Olien <dmo@osdl.org>,
	Tim Pepper <tpepper@gmail.com>,
	SCSI Mailing List <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question about Request Sense case in scsi_lib.c
Date: 14 Oct 2004 10:25:22 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1097767531.1717.20.camel@mulgrave> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ac71172a0410132349715aa9b4@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 2004-10-14 at 01:49, Lan Tran wrote:
> And it was due to the fact that when a bio is sent down to the
> mid-layer, it would come back with another bio chained to it, so when
> the original bio was retried, the  number of segments that were mapped
> (i.e. 2, one from each bio) did not match the value stored in
> cmd->use_sg (i.e. 1).

This sounds a bit unlikely, since the SCSI layer never deals with bios
per se, it merely maps a request (which is a collection of bios).  What
was the evidence that this was happening?

I can see the reverse being true: the scsi request is partially complete
when requeued, so some of the bios are fully complete and somehow this
causes a miscalculation in the segments.  However, the miscalculation
has to be that we undercount the number of needed request slots, and
this looks hard to do.

>  I still haven't figured out why chained bios
> from indepedent IO requests are returned from the mid-layer ... but
> may be a similar issue you're seeing here?

It sounds similar.  The problem seems to be in requeuing somehow.  I'm
going to dig out my old requeueing simulator and see if I can reproduce
it.

James



  reply	other threads:[~2004-10-14 15:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <53CF1076699CD711B7DD0002A51363F1072A6E3A@exw-ks.ks.lsil.com>
2004-10-13 21:46 ` Question about Request Sense case in scsi_lib.c 'Dave Olien'
2004-10-13 21:56   ` James Bottomley
2004-10-13 22:09     ` 'Dave Olien'
2004-10-14 17:52     ` 'Dave Olien'
2004-10-14 18:05       ` James Bottomley
2004-10-14 20:39       ` James Bottomley
2004-10-14  0:30 ` Douglas Gilbert
2004-10-14  6:49   ` Lan Tran
2004-10-14 15:25     ` James Bottomley [this message]
2004-10-12  0:00 Dave Olien
     [not found] ` <eada2a07041012092973d35415@mail.gmail.com>
2004-10-12 16:31   ` Tim Pepper
2004-10-12 16:59   ` Dave Olien
2004-10-12 17:13     ` James Bottomley
2004-10-12 17:59       ` Dave Olien
2004-10-12 20:13         ` Patrick Mansfield
2004-10-12 20:44           ` Dave Olien
2004-10-13  2:10       ` Douglas Gilbert
2004-10-13 17:56         ` Dave Olien

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=1097767531.1717.20.camel@mulgrave \
    --to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
    --cc=dmo@osdl.org \
    --cc=dougg@torque.net \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tpepper@gmail.com \
    --cc=transter@gmail.com \
    --cc=yanling.qi@engenio.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