From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: dm core patches
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 17:57:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040216165756.GB18938@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1076690681.2158.54.camel@mulgrave>
On Fri, Feb 13 2004, James Bottomley wrote:
> > The mechanism is in place, but the SCSI stack still needs a few changes
> > to pass down the correct errors. The easiest would be to pass down
> > pseudo-sense keys (I'd rather just call them something else as not to
> > confuse things, io error hints or something) to
> > end_that_request_first(), changing uptodate from a bool to a hint.
>
> Yes, I'm ready to do this in SCSI. I think the uptodate field should
> include at least two (and possibly three) failure type indications:
>
> - fatal: error cannot be retried
> - retryable: error may be retried
>
> and possibly
>
> - informational: This is dangerous, since it's giving information about
> a transaction that actually succeeded (i.e. we'd need to fix drivers to
> recognise it as being uptodate but with info, like sector remapped)
>
> Then, we also have a error origin indication:
>
> - device: The device is actually reporting the problem
> - transport: the error is a transport error
> - driver: the error comes from the device driver.
>
> So dm would know that fatal transport or driver errors could be
> repathed, but fatal device errors probably couldn't.
>
> Any that I've missed?
Nope, this looks pretty spot-on to me. I have to agree with Lars and
rather keep it simple and straight forward, than introduce shady
informational bits.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-16 16:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-13 16:44 dm core patches James Bottomley
2004-02-16 8:22 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2004-02-16 16:57 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2004-02-16 17:04 ` James Bottomley
2004-02-19 0:26 ` Mike Christie
2004-02-19 3:40 ` Jeff Garzik
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-02-10 16:35 Joe Thornber
2004-02-11 10:16 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2004-02-11 10:35 ` Joe Thornber
2004-02-12 18:51 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2004-02-12 20:13 ` Joe Thornber
2004-02-13 15:12 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2004-02-13 15:39 ` Joe Thornber
2004-02-13 16:08 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-02-16 8:19 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2004-02-16 9:35 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-02-13 23:46 ` Mike Anderson
2004-02-16 12:17 ` Heinz Mauelshagen
2004-02-13 16:03 ` Jens Axboe
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=20040216165756.GB18938@suse.de \
--to=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=James.Bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@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