From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Mike Anderson <andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dm mpath: add feature flag to control call to blk_abort_queue
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:48:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101118154807.GA15381@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101118072032.GA13390@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Thu, Nov 18 2010 at 2:20am -0500,
Mike Anderson <andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Mike S,
>
> Thanks for doing the refresh / update of the patch.
> I just did a quick test and did not see any issues but did have a couple
> of questions.
>
> Two questions:
>
> 1.) Should we bump the multipath targets version for this change?
Yes, not doing so was an oversight. I'll bump the version and post v3.
> 2.) A general question on the length of the feature name
> "abort_queue_on_failure" while the descriptive name is nice I noticed if
> I have two features that the multipath output line starts wrapping. I
> guess we could make the feature name shorter, but eventually if we added
> more features the line would eventually wrap so a shorted name will just
> stop wrapping now.
I'm open to other suggestions for the feature name.
I agree that we don't want feature names to get too long. But they do
need to be descriptive. So we need to have some balance. I could've
used "abort_q_on_failure" but I went for "queue" to maintain symmetry
with "queue_if_no_path". Similarly, abbreviating "failure" to "fail"
seemed like it didn't buy much (less clear?). *shrug* Maybe
"abort_queue_on_fail" offers a better balance?
As for the wrapping, I don't think there is anything we can do to avoid
it (given the current interface).
Thanks,
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-18 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-12 5:23 block_abort_queue (blk_abort_request) racing with scsi_request_fn Mike Anderson
2010-11-10 7:09 ` [dm-devel] " Mike Christie
2010-11-10 7:30 ` Mike Christie
2010-11-10 16:30 ` Mike Anderson
2010-11-10 21:16 ` Mike Christie
2010-11-12 17:54 ` Mike Anderson
2010-11-16 21:39 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-11-17 17:49 ` [dm-devel] " Mike Anderson
2010-11-17 21:55 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-11-18 4:40 ` [PATCH v2] dm mpath: add feature flag to control call to blk_abort_queue Mike Snitzer
2010-11-18 7:20 ` Mike Anderson
2010-11-18 15:48 ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2010-11-18 15:48 ` [PATCH v3] " Mike Snitzer
2010-11-18 19:16 ` (unknown), Mike Snitzer
2010-11-18 19:21 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-11-18 19:19 ` [PATCH v4] dm mpath: avoid call to blk_abort_queue by default Mike Snitzer
2010-11-18 20:07 ` [PATCH v5] " Mike Snitzer
2010-11-18 20:18 ` [dm-devel] " Alasdair G Kergon
2010-11-18 20:39 ` Mike Anderson
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=20101118154807.GA15381@redhat.com \
--to=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).