On 11/26/2012 06:23 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 11/21/12 08:19, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
Hmm.
This would still mean that the eh thread will run until finished.
Which can take _A LOT_ of time (we're speaking hours here).
I would rather have an additional return code in the various
scsi_try_XXX fu
On 11/21/12 08:19, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> Hmm.
> This would still mean that the eh thread will run until finished.
> Which can take _A LOT_ of time (we're speaking hours here).
> I would rather have an additional return code in the various
> scsi_try_XXX functions to terminate the loop quickly.
On 11/21/12 08:19, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 11/20/2012 03:24 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
If I interpret the SCSI error handler source code correctly then
scsi_unjam_host() may proceed concurrently with scsi_remove_host().
This means that the LLD eh_abort_handler callback may get invoked after
sc
On 11/20/2012 03:24 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
Hello,
If I interpret the SCSI error handler source code correctly then
scsi_unjam_host() may proceed concurrently with scsi_remove_host().
This means that the LLD eh_abort_handler callback may get invoked after
scsi_remove_host() finished. At least
Hello,
If I interpret the SCSI error handler source code correctly then
scsi_unjam_host() may proceed concurrently with scsi_remove_host().
This means that the LLD eh_abort_handler callback may get invoked after
scsi_remove_host() finished. At least the SRP initiator (ib_srp) cleans
up resources n
5 matches
Mail list logo