From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH] first cut at fixing unable to requeue with no outstanding commands Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 12:30:59 -0400 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <200210011630.g91GUx204378@localhost.localdomain> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: (from root@localhost) by pogo.mtv1.steeleye.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA05384 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 09:31:04 -0700 Received: from localhost.localdomain (sshppp-200.mtv1.steeleye.com [172.16.1.200]) by pogo.mtv1.steeleye.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA05295 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 09:31:01 -0700 Received: from mulgrave (jejb@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/linuxconf) with ESMTP id g91GUx204378 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 12:30:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: Message from Mike Anderson of "Tue, 01 Oct 2002 09:23:48 PDT." <20021001162347.GA1242@beaverton.ibm.com> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org andmike@us.ibm.com said: > - Is the call to scsi_delete_timer really necessary. All callers > have already deleted the timer. The del_timer function takes a > lock which would be nice to avoid if we do not need to call > it. If we want to protect the code we could do a quick check > on SCset->eh_timeout.function prior to calling. That's a belt and braces thing. I suppose we could change it to BUG_ON timer active and see what pops out of the woodwork. andmike@us.ibm.com said: > - Patrick pointed out a while ago that the "if (host->host_busy > == 0)" check and the similar one for the device will never be > called because to be in this function the values of these > variables need to be at least 1. I believe this direct call to > scsi_retry_command should be removed instead of adjusting the > check to "== 1" as this seems counter to how you are trying to > handle busy. Yes, I plan on slowly removing all automatic reissues of commands. I've already removed the checks in my local tree (and the corresponding reissues). James