Re: [PATCH] Improve ZBC/ZAC error handling

2018-03-06 Thread Damien Le Moal
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).

Re: [PATCH] Improve ZBC/ZAC error handling

2018-03-06 Thread Martin K. Petersen
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). scsi_error.c is SPC territory, we really shouldn't wedge an

Re: [PATCH] Improve ZBC/ZAC error handling

2018-03-04 Thread Damien Le Moal
Tejun, On 2018/03/05 5:33, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 04:40:18AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> This series introduces changes to scsi and libata error handling for ZBC and >> ZAC >> devices. >> >> The first patch moves ZBC specific error handling in sd_zbc_complete() to a >> gen

Re: [PATCH] Improve ZBC/ZAC error handling

2018-03-04 Thread Tejun Heo
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 04:40:18AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: > This series introduces changes to scsi and libata error handling for ZBC and > ZAC > devices. > > The first patch moves ZBC specific error handling in sd_zbc_complete() to a > generic scsi error function that can be used also in li

[PATCH] Improve ZBC/ZAC error handling

2018-03-01 Thread Damien Le Moal
This series introduces changes to scsi and libata error handling for ZBC and ZAC devices. The first patch moves ZBC specific error handling in sd_zbc_complete() to a generic scsi error function that can be used also in libata (second patch). The goal of this change is to limit retries for commands