On Wed, Aug 25 2010 at 4:00am -0400,
Kiyoshi Ueda <email@example.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure how to proceed here. How much work would
> > discerning between transport and IO errors take? If it can't be done
> > quickly enough the retry logic can be kept around to keep the old
> > behavior but that already was a broken behavior, so... :-(
> I'm not sure how long will it take.
We first need to understand what direction we want to go with this. We
currently have 2 options. But any other ideas are obviously welcome.
Mike Christie has a patchset that introduce more specific
target/transport/host error codes. Mike shared these pointers but he'd
have to put the work in to refresh them:
errno.h new EXYZ
I think that patchset's appoach is fairly disruptive just to be able to
train upper layers to differentiate (e.g. mpath). But in the end maybe
that change takes the code in a more desirable direction?
Another option is Hannes' approach of having DM consume req->errors and
SCSI sense more directly.
I've refreshed Hannes' previous patchset against 2.6.36-rc2 but I
haven't finished testing it yet (should be OK.. it boots, but still have
FIXME to move scsi_uld_should_retry to scsi_error.c):
Would be great if James, Hannes and others had a look at this
refreshed RFC patchset. It's clearly not polished but it gives an idea
of the approach. Does this look worthwhile?
Follow-on work is needed to refine scsi_uld_should_retry further. Keep
in mind that scsi_error.c is the intended location for this code.
James, please note that I've attempted to make REQ_TYPE_FS set
req->errors only for "genuine errors" by (ab)using
If others think this may be worthwhile I can finish testing, cleanup the
patches further, and post them.
dm-devel mailing list