public inbox for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
To: Michael Heinz <mheinz@infiniconsys.com>
Cc: linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Possible bug handling bad I/Os?
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 12:41:42 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020829124142.D31625@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B9939B24.2BFC%mheinz@infiniconsys.com>; from mheinz@infiniconsys.com on Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 09:34:28AM -0400

On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 09:34:28AM -0400, Michael Heinz wrote:
> The last thing to happen seemed to be that my driver would get a call to
> queue_command while I knew the connection was down. Since I knew the
> connection was down I would simply immediately return an error and do
> nothing else.

[ You didn't specify your kernel version, so the below comment is for 2.4 
kernels, on 2.5 kernels all drivers are treated as new eh drivers ]
Does your driver use the new eh code?  If not, then this is your problem.  
Non new eh code based drivers are not allowed to fail a queue_command 
call, and the return value isn't checked.

> So, my question is: Is this the right way to handle this problem, or is
> there another issue? At least part of the SCSI system knows the command was
> bad, because it never tries to abort it - but it never issues another
> command, either.

Summary.  If your driver is not a new eh code driver (it still uses the 
old recovery interface), then queue_command() may not fail and if you need 
to bail on a command, then you might as well just call the done() function 
with this command as the argument from queue_command then return.  If it 
is a new eh driver, then you need to make sure you never bail out on a 
request when there are no commands currently active/busy on that device or 
else the new queue code will quit sending commands to this device 
permanently.

-- 
  Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>     919-754-3700 x44233
         Red Hat, Inc. 
         1801 Varsity Dr.
         Raleigh, NC 27606
  

  reply	other threads:[~2002-08-29 16:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-08-29 13:34 Possible bug handling bad I/Os? Michael Heinz
2002-08-29 16:41 ` Doug Ledford [this message]
2002-08-29 16:58   ` Michael Heinz
2002-08-29 17:11   ` Michael Heinz
2002-08-29 17:27     ` Doug Ledford
2002-08-29 19:16       ` Luben Tuikov
2002-08-29 19:43         ` Doug Ledford
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-08-29 15:12 Martin Peschke3
2002-08-29 15:14 ` Michael Heinz

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=20020829124142.D31625@redhat.com \
    --to=dledford@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mheinz@infiniconsys.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