Re: [PATCH 2/4] scsi: add transport host byte errors

2007-03-15 Thread James Smart
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: fast_io_fail_tmo iscsi: session recovery_tmo fc: rport fast_io_fail_tmo The difference is that when the timer fires, for iscsi we unblock the queue and fail commands in the blocked queue. FC just fails IO running in the driver/fw/hw. The IO in the blocked queue sits

Re: [PATCH 2/4] scsi: add transport host byte errors

2007-03-15 Thread James Smart
So my position changes a little now that you pointed out that you release the request queue when fastfail kicks in. Mike Christie wrote: Do we want to fail IO that was sitting in the queue _and_ all new incoming IO or just what was sitting in the queue? I believe all i/o - so that the upper

[PATCH 2/4] scsi: add transport host byte errors

2007-03-14 Thread michaelc
From: Mike Christie [EMAIL PROTECTED] Small guide to differences in iscsi and fc: I_T nexus or port we are connected to at some other end point iscsi: iscsi_session fc: rport fast_io_fail_tmo iscsi: session recovery_tmo fc: rport fast_io_fail_tmo The difference is that when the timer fires,

Re: [PATCH 2/4] scsi: add transport host byte errors

2007-03-14 Thread Mike Christie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The following patches attempt unify what upper layers will see drivers like multipath can make a good guess. This relies on drivers being Oops, I mean to say with the patches upper layers like multipath will see common behavior from LLDs hooked into transport classes.

Re: [PATCH 2/4] scsi: add transport host byte errors

2007-03-14 Thread Mike Christie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When using multipath and the fast_io_fail_tmo fires then the class can fail commands with DID_TRANSPORT_FAILFAST or drivers can use Bah, that is going to be wrong or ugly for tape commands. We would want to add another new value, DID_TRANSPORT_ABORTED which would check