From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH] Format Unit can take many hours Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 19:27:54 +0200 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040511172753.GY1906@suse.de> References: <20040511114936.GI4828@tpkurt.garloff.de> <20040511122037.GG1906@suse.de> <40A0FAE9.90900@pobox.com> <20040511161427.GW1906@suse.de> <20040511162638.GU4828@tpkurt.garloff.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:25034 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264886AbUEKR3E (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 May 2004 13:29:04 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040511162638.GU4828@tpkurt.garloff.de> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Kurt Garloff , Jeff Garzik , Linux SCSI list , Linux kernel list On Tue, May 11 2004, Kurt Garloff wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 06:14:27PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Tue, May 11 2004, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > Jens Axboe wrote: > > > >block/scsi_ioctl.c should likely receive similar treatment then. > > > > > > This timeout is dependent on media size, I should think... > > > > > > Is there any reason to think that this timeout will _not_ be continually > > > patched in the future, as larger and larger sizes are used? > > The disks gets faster as well. > > But if we have to touch it every three years, I don't see this as a > huge problem either. If you want some more room, you can set it to > 24hrs now ... Precisely. No need to over-engineer. > > > I think the timeout is only used for ancient programs that use the old > > sg interface. Newer programs should pass in the timeout themselves, or > > set IMMED as somebody else in this thread noted. > > If you do use the sg interface, you can specify the timeout. > If you use SCSI_IOCTL_SEND_COMMAND, there's no way to do it and > the value from scsi_ioctl.c applies. Even the oldest sg interface? SCSI_IOCTL_SEND_COMMAND should have been put to rest at least 5 years ago :) -- Jens Axboe