public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
To: Chris Boot <bootc@bootc.net>
Cc: linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firewire-sbp2: Initialise sbp2_orb->rcode for management ORBs
Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 12:29:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120519122949.0024a909@stein> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120304134802.2ed6fbd6@stein>

On Mar 04 Stefan Richter wrote:
> On Feb 18 Chris Boot wrote:
> > When sending ORBs the struct sbp2_orb->rcode field should be initialised
> > to -1 otherwise complete_transaction() assumes the request is successful
> > (RCODE_COMPLETE is 0). When sending managament ORBs, such as LOGIN or
> > LOGOUT, this was not done and so the initiator would wait for the
> > request to time out before trying again.
> > 
> > Without this, LOGINs are only retried when the management ORB times out,
> > rather than the initiator noticing an error occurred and retrying soon
> > after. For targets that advertise more than one LUN per unit, and can
> > only accept one management request at a time, this means LUNs are only
> > logged in one per timeout period.
[...]
> I left this hanging in my inbox for too long, sorry...
> 
> While I agree that the current initialization of orb->base.rcode with 0 is
> wrong, I don't think your change alone is sufficient:
> 
> Consider the case that a login request to LU 0 causes the target to pull
> out the hardware behind that LU out of a powered-down state --- which may
> take a very long time --- and login requests to LU 1 would be aborted by
> the target with resp_conflict_error on any Management_Agent write
> request.  Of course a reasonably clever target would accept login before
> full power-up, but you never now.
> 
> We retry login 5 times in 0.2 seconds intervals, and this 1 s in total may
> not be enough.
[...]

Chris, I obviously haven't done anything about this potentially too short
retry period yet; it is still on my list.

Perhaps we should not count the number of retries but watch the time that
retries take.  I.e. accumulate the time that each try takes; break out of
the retry loop after a maximum time; but reset the accumulated time at a
bus reset as a precaution for buses with many nodes coming online at
different times.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-===-- -=-= =--==
http://arcgraph.de/sr/

      reply	other threads:[~2012-05-19 10:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-02-18 21:35 [PATCH] firewire-sbp2: Initialise sbp2_orb->rcode for management ORBs Chris Boot
2012-03-04 12:48 ` Stefan Richter
2012-05-19 10:29   ` Stefan Richter [this message]

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=20120519122949.0024a909@stein \
    --to=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
    --cc=bootc@bootc.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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