linux-scsi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* channel busy
@ 2005-11-16 15:51 Jeff Garzik
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Garzik @ 2005-11-16 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: SCSI Mailing List

It would be nice if the SCSI core supported the concept of "channel 
busy".  SCSI understands host-busy and device-busy.

Right now libata allocates one scsi host per ATA port largely due to 
SCSI implementation details, and I would like to get away from that.

	Jeff



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* RE: channel busy
@ 2005-11-16 16:11 James.Smart
  2005-11-18 17:05 ` Jeff Garzik
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: James.Smart @ 2005-11-16 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: jgarzik, linux-scsi

True - and we've been dancing around target busy as well.  Basically,
if there's an HCIL, any component of the HCIL could potentially be busy.
And, stirring the pot, there could be different queuing/resource limits
at each point as well.

-- james

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org]On Behalf Of Jeff Garzik
> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 10:51 AM
> To: SCSI Mailing List
> Subject: channel busy
> 
> 
> It would be nice if the SCSI core supported the concept of "channel 
> busy".  SCSI understands host-busy and device-busy.
> 
> Right now libata allocates one scsi host per ATA port largely due to 
> SCSI implementation details, and I would like to get away from that.
> 
> 	Jeff
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe 
> linux-scsi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: channel busy
  2005-11-16 16:11 James.Smart
@ 2005-11-18 17:05 ` Jeff Garzik
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Garzik @ 2005-11-18 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: James.Smart; +Cc: linux-scsi

James.Smart@Emulex.Com wrote:
> True - and we've been dancing around target busy as well.  Basically,
> if there's an HCIL, any component of the HCIL could potentially be busy.
> And, stirring the pot, there could be different queuing/resource limits
> at each point as well.

Agreed.

	Jeff




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2005-11-18 17:05 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-11-16 15:51 channel busy Jeff Garzik
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-11-16 16:11 James.Smart
2005-11-18 17:05 ` Jeff Garzik

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).