On 2018/03/07 3:49, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> Tejun,
>> Except for the nit on the last patch, ata part looks good to me.
>> Martin, how do you wanna route the SCSI part?
> I want to route it to /dev/null on the grounds of being a BLATANT
> LAYERING VIOLATION (cue dramatic sound effect).

Got it... Will add some more rework to v2.

> scsi_error.c is SPC territory, we really shouldn't wedge any ZBC/SBC
> stuff in there. Nor should we call into this file from libata. If
> there's a ZAC/ZBC SAT retry deficiency, let's address that instead of
> working around it.

Understood. sd_zbc already handles the retry checks for scsi side, and almost
exactly the same code is necessary from libata (since retry tests are based on
sense asc/ascq and not on ATA status bits). So is it OK to export a function
from sd_zbc.c to call from libata ? Replicating the code is of course trivial
but rather dirty.

Best regards.

Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

Reply via email to