From: Christof Schmitt <christof.schmitt@de.ibm.com>
To: James Smart <James.Smart@Emulex.Com>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: FC transport: Calling fc_remote_port_add for online port
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:52:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090629135204.GA12016@schmichrtp.de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A44FA1C.9080207@emulex.com>
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 12:41:00PM -0400, James Smart wrote:
> The LLD should never be calling fc_remote_port_add() twice without an
> intervening fc_remote_port_delete(). Which is another way of saying -
> yes, it's what you say relative to the rport state values.
>
> The idea is - the LLD is tracking an external port structure, using
> <portid, <wwnn,wwpn>> to track identity, and is keeping a "present" and
> "not-present" case. If a new port is deemed "present", it calls
> fc_remote_port_add() and when connectivity is lost (aka goes to "not
> present") to that port, it calls fc_remote_port_delete(). It should be
> very straight forward.
>
> The rport structure itself, to aid the midlayer, to hide temporary
> connectivity losses due to link bounces, controller resets, etc - may
> stay around after the delete call, and midlayer calls may enter the
> driver for it, but the transport via helper functions, should pick them
> off and reject them. Eventually, when the rport exceeds its max
> connectivity loss hide value (devloss_tmo), the devloss_tmo_callbk() is
> made to tell the driver the rport is truly gone (if it cares), and all
> the midlayer structures and scsi objects below the rport are terminated.
> After this point, for target id bindings, we keep the rport structure
> around - but only as a generic container to hold the binding values. For
> all intents and purposes, there's no relationship to the old rport or the
> old rport pointer value any more. And if a port eventually comes back
> that matches the bindings, we flip the binding container back into a real
> rport structure as if we had just allocated it.
>
> -- james s
Thanks for clarifying this. So a LLD has to always follow the
add-delete sequence.
BTW: I think it could be useful to have this information about the
interface between LLD and FC transport in
Documentation/scsi/scsi_fc_transport.txt
--
Christof Schmitt
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-29 13:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-26 15:23 FC transport: Calling fc_remote_port_add for online port Christof Schmitt
2009-06-26 16:41 ` James Smart
2009-06-29 13:52 ` Christof Schmitt [this message]
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=20090629135204.GA12016@schmichrtp.de.ibm.com \
--to=christof.schmitt@de.ibm.com \
--cc=James.Smart@Emulex.Com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.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