On Wednesday 24 June 2009 08:49:29 David Miller wrote:
> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 23:26:06 +0200
>
> > @@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ void ide_kill_rq(ide_drive_t *drive, str
> >
> > if ((media == ide_floppy || media == ide_tape) && drv_req) {
> > rq->errors = 0;
> > - ide_complete_rq(drive, 0, blk_rq_bytes(rq));
> > + ide_complete_rq(drive, -EIO, blk_rq_bytes(rq));
> > } else {
> > if (media == ide_tape)
> > rq->errors = IDE_DRV_ERROR_GENERAL;
>
> I've done some research and this logic of returning "0" appears to be
> intentional.
>
> It keeps the block layer from printing the "I/O error" kernel log
> message during completion of the request.
It would be pretty illogical behavior for driver to intentionally not
let user know about the failed requests..
> IDE tape as one example, seems to have it's own system of passing
> errors back up to the special command completion, via rq->errors
> and IDE_DRV_ERROR_GENERAL.
Please look at the patch/code:
rq->errors = 0;
- ide_complete_rq(drive, 0, blk_rq_bytes(rq));
+ ide_complete_rq(drive, -EIO, blk_rq_bytes(rq));
and notice rq->errors line.
> See idetape_queue_rw_tail() and ide_tape_callback() for example.
>
> IDE floppy has similar pieces of logic, and possibly similar desires
> wrt. emission of the block layer I/O error log message during
> special requests.
>
> When something sticks out like an eyesore (as this -EIO thing does)
> and seems to make no sense at all, there often is some obscure
> reason.
The obscure reasons is just the fact that both ide-floppy and ide-tape
had a they own duplicated/buggy request completion routines.
While they were being unified the whole bunch of similar class of bugs
were fixed so I agree that there may still be more issues to deal with
there.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
