From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ric Wheeler Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi_lib.c: continue after MEDIUM_ERROR Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 11:35:14 -0500 Message-ID: <45C0C542.2090609@emc.com> References: <200701301947.08478.liml@rtr.ca> <1170206199.10890.13.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> <311601c90701301725n53d25a74g652b7ca3bfc64c56@mail.gmail.com> <45BFF3D6.9050605@rtr.ca> <45C00AEE.1090708@emc.com> <45C0B0DC.8030501@rtr.ca> <20070131152301.19a8a5ac@localhost.localdomain> Reply-To: ric@emc.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20070131152301.19a8a5ac@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cc: Mark Lord , "Eric D. Mudama" , James Bottomley , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, IDE/ATA development list , linux-scsi , dougg@torque.net List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Alan wrote: >> When libata reports a MEDIUM_ERROR to us, we *know* it's non-recoverable, >> as the drive itself has already done internal retries (libata uses the >> "with retry" ATA opcodes for this). > > This depends on the firmware. Some of the "raid firmware" drives don't > appear to do retries in firmware. I think that even for these devices, the actual drives behind the controller will do retries. In any case, it would be reasonable to be able to set this retry/no-retry via /sys to handle exceptional cases... > >> But meanwhile, we still have the original issue too, where a single stray >> bad sector can blow a system out of the water, because the mid-layer >> currently aborts everything after it from a large merged request. >> >> Thus the original patch from this thread. :) > > Agreed