> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-scsi-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-scsi- > ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Martin Wilck > Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 7:19 AM > To: Don Brace <don.br...@microsemi.com>; joseph.szczy...@hpe.com; > Gerry Morong <gerry.mor...@microsemi.com>; John Hall > <john.h...@microsemi.com>; j...@linux.vnet.ibm.com; Kevin Barnett > <kevin.barn...@microsemi.com>; Mahesh Rajashekhara > <mahesh.rajashekh...@microsemi.com>; Bader Ali - Saleh > <bader.alisa...@microsemi.com>; h...@infradead.org; Scott Teel > <scott.t...@microsemi.com>; Viswas G <viswa...@microsemi.com>; Justin > Lindley <justin.lind...@microsemi.com>; Scott Benesh > <scott.ben...@microsemi.com>; posw...@suse.com > Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/12] hpsa: separate monitor events from heartbeat > worker > > > +/* > > + * watch for controller events > > + */ > > +static void hpsa_event_monitor_worker(struct work_struct *work) > > +{ > > + struct ctlr_info *h = container_of(to_delayed_work(work), > > + struct ctlr_info, event_monitor_work); > > + > > + if (h->remove_in_progress) > > + return; > > + > > + if (hpsa_ctlr_needs_rescan(h)) { > > + scsi_host_get(h->scsi_host); > > + hpsa_ack_ctlr_events(h); > > + hpsa_scan_start(h->scsi_host); > > + scsi_host_put(h->scsi_host); > > + } > > + > > + if (!h->remove_in_progress) > > + schedule_delayed_work(&h->event_monitor_work, > > + HPSA_EVENT_MONITOR_INTERVAL) > > ; > > +} > > + > > The new worker thread duplicates code from hpsa_rescan_ctlr_worker. I > find this a bit irritating. Could you maybe use just a single worker, > and just check using time stamps whether the "big" heartbeat needs to > be performed? > > Regards > Martin > > -- > Dr. Martin Wilck <mwi...@suse.com>, Tel. +49 (0)911 74053 2107 > SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton > HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
We thought about that, but we want to separate controller events from the rescan worker. Both can cause a rescan to occur however for multipath we have found that we need to respond faster than the normal scheduled rescan interval for path fail-overs. Getting controller events only involves reading a register, but the rescan worker can obtain an updated LUN list when there is a PTRAID device present. However, I did refactor the patch to move common code to a separate function. Would this be more acceptable? Thanks, Don Brace ESC - Smart Storage Microsemi Corporation
