From: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
To: "Salyzyn, Mark" <Mark_Salyzyn@adaptec.com>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/24][RFC] dpt_i2o: Use new scsi_eh_cpy_sense()
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 10:51:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47A823A2.6090200@panasas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <532ABFBDAAC3A34EB12EBA6CEC2838F439766174@ADPE2K703.adaptec.com>
On Mon, Feb 04 2008 at 20:32 +0200, "Salyzyn, Mark" <Mark_Salyzyn@adaptec.com> wrote:
> ACK with condition that community accepts the RFC's entire premise.
>
> The removed code that shunted the REQUEST_SENSE was based on the assumption
> that the sense data in the current scsi command packet was left over from the
> previous command's execution with a check condition as the scsi command packet
> is reused to issue the REQUEST_SENSE. For a new, or second from the target's point
> of view, request sense to the target issued by these older kernels would always
> return an erased sense. The dpt_i2o driver does not itself maintain the sense history,
> nor does the Firmware. This behavior, I believe, is not the case for current kernels so
> the code fragment made little sense (pun not intended). If my historical knowledge is
> correct, this (now removed) workaround makes no more sense because the scsi layer correctly
> manages adapters that produce auto-request sense and does not ever turn around the command
> and send a second request for sense information.
> Given this understanding, I have no problem with the removed fragment of REQUEST_SENSE shunting.
> However, I do urge some target error recovery testing, tape drives being the likely type of target
> affected by this change. I have no such hardware to confirm...
> Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn
I have removed this test because the midlayer does a scsi_eh_reset_sense() just before
the new invocation of a command. So even if the second bad REQUEST_SENSE comes this
will not filter it out anymore. If such a thing still happens? A driver state machine
must be used to filter it out, or of course midlayer should be fixed.
Boaz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-05 8:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-04 15:58 [PATCH 5/24][RFC] dpt_i2o: Use new scsi_eh_cpy_sense() Boaz Harrosh
2008-02-04 18:32 ` Salyzyn, Mark
2008-02-05 8:51 ` Boaz Harrosh [this message]
2008-02-05 13:51 ` Salyzyn, Mark
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=47A823A2.6090200@panasas.com \
--to=bharrosh@panasas.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=Mark_Salyzyn@adaptec.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.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