From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752866Ab2IYFV7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Sep 2012 01:21:59 -0400 Received: from mail-qa0-f53.google.com ([209.85.216.53]:61588 "EHLO mail-qa0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752208Ab2IYFV6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Sep 2012 01:21:58 -0400 Message-ID: <50613F72.4000302@pobox.com> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 01:21:54 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120827 Thunderbird/15.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: James Bottomley CC: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: [SCSI PATCH] sd: max-retries becomes configurable References: <20120924210049.GA18527@havoc.gtf.org> <1348546019.2457.3.camel@dabdike> In-Reply-To: <1348546019.2457.3.camel@dabdike> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/25/2012 12:06 AM, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 17:00 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> >> drivers/scsi/sd.c | 4 ++++ >> drivers/scsi/sd.h | 2 +- >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > I'm not opposed in principle to doing this (except that it should be a > sysfs parameter like all our other controls), but what's the reasoning > behind needing it changed? Periodically turns up as a useful field sledgehammer for solving problems, until the real problem is found and fixed. Got tired of a very similar patch manually bouncing around the "hey, pssst, this worked for me" backchannel IT network. Can you be more specific about sysfs location? A runtime-writable (via sysfs!) module parameter for a module-wide default seemed appropriate. Jeff