From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>
To: Michael Reed <mdr@sgi.com>
Cc: James.Smart@Emulex.Com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, Jim Nead <jnead@sgi.com>,
Jeremy Higdon <jeremy@sgi.com>, Gary Hagensen <gwh@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] make fc transport removal of target configurable
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 15:02:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1150228960.3441.72.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <448F1403.6090903@sgi.com>
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 14:37 -0500, Michael Reed wrote:
> Not really true as the transport holds off the error handler until the
> transport dev loss timer expires.
>
> And afterwards, commands are returned immediately with DID_NO_CONNECT.
> The device is never offlined (with my patch applied).
That was just a general examination of the options for retaining contact
with the target.
It seems we both agree that returning an error is about the only viable
option, in which case the user or application has to take a recovery
action anyway, so there's no logical difference between what you propose
and what we currently do as far as the application or filesystem is
concerned.
The only difference is what happens if the device reappears. However,
since the application has to be modified in either case: your patch to
continually probe with I/O to see if the device has returned, or the
existing case to wait out the udev event that says the device is back it
doesn't really buy us anything for the application. Since the rest of
our infrastructure is already event driven, or migrating that way, I
really don't see value in introducing an anomaly like this purely for
fibre channel.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-06-13 20:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-06-12 23:16 [PATCH] make fc transport removal of target configurable Michael Reed
2006-06-13 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-06-13 11:06 ` James Smart
2006-06-13 15:42 ` Michael Reed
2006-06-13 17:24 ` Stefan Richter
2006-06-13 19:36 ` Michael Reed
2006-06-13 23:13 ` Stefan Richter
2006-06-13 17:33 ` Steve Byan
2006-06-13 19:35 ` Michael Reed
2006-06-13 19:49 ` Steve Byan
2006-06-13 17:59 ` James Bottomley
2006-06-13 19:37 ` Michael Reed
2006-06-13 20:02 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2006-06-13 21:44 ` Michael Reed
2006-06-14 7:21 ` Hannes Reinecke
2006-06-14 16:18 ` Mike Christie
2006-06-14 16:31 ` Mike Christie
2006-06-15 9:04 ` Stefan Richter
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=1150228960.3441.72.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com \
--to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=James.Smart@Emulex.Com \
--cc=gwh@sgi.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jeremy@sgi.com \
--cc=jnead@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mdr@sgi.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