From: Patrick Mansfield <patmans@us.ibm.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
Cc: Pat LaVarre <p.lavarre@ieee.org>,
dmitrik@users.sourceforge.net, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't retry SG_IO (REQ_BLOCK_PC) commands.
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:51:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031120135123.A2366@beaverton.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031120191651.GE1106@suse.de>; from axboe@suse.de on Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 08:16:51PM +0100
On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 08:16:51PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20 2003, Mike Anderson wrote:
> > Patrick Mansfield [patmans@us.ibm.com] wrote:
> > > Don't retry SG_IO (REQ_BLOCK_PC) commands.
> >
> > Should we also have the REQ_BLOCK_PC requests set REQ_FAILFAST? The
> > patch to sd will imply the same behavior.
>
> Definitely!
Should the setting of REQ_FAILFAST be expanded to prevent requeueing after
a device or host reports queue full?
There are probably many SG_IO users that would want them retried, others
(multimedia?) might not want a retry. Multi-path would *not* want them
retried (well at least the host queue full).
For IO that cannot be sent to the device (if we have !scsi_dev_queue_ready()
or !scsi_host_queue_ready()), it is unclear if REQ_FAILFAST should
complete the IO without ever having sent it to the device.
If we expand the checks for REQ_FAILFAST, the SG_IO user interface should
allow the conditional setting of it.
-- Patrick Mansfield
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-20 21:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-20 16:55 [PATCH] Don't retry SG_IO (REQ_BLOCK_PC) commands Patrick Mansfield
2003-11-20 18:15 ` Mike Anderson
2003-11-20 19:16 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-20 21:51 ` Patrick Mansfield [this message]
2003-11-21 10:17 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-21 12:48 ` James Bottomley
2003-11-21 14:12 ` James Bottomley
2003-11-22 23:00 ` Andries Brouwer
2003-11-21 16:26 ` Patrick Mansfield
2003-11-21 18:23 ` Jens Axboe
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=20031120135123.A2366@beaverton.ibm.com \
--to=patmans@us.ibm.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=dmitrik@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=p.lavarre@ieee.org \
/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