Jeff Garzik wrote: > Tejun Heo wrote: >> NeilBrown wrote: >>> I tried that and easily found cases where it fails way too fast. >>> FAILFAST seems to mean different things on different devices, making >>> it useless in general (it is still useful in some specific cases >>> such as multipath on devices which are expected to be used under >>> multipath and so treat FAILFAST appropriately). >> >> Yeap, FAILFAST flags seem geared pretty much toward multipathing. > > Yes :/ > > I'm glad this area is getting some attention, because we ideally want to > do two things in parallel: > > * send upper layer advisory message, when we first notice a failure > * begin EH recovery > > Time passes, libata attempts recovery, and completes the command with > success or failure many seconds later. > > Right now, failfast handling is inconsistent, and is not (I think...) > always signalled as soon as we begin EH. Heh.. yeah, it's notified on completion of EH, which BTW is pretty dumb. :-) -- tejun -- 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
