On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 04:27:26AM -0800, Raj, Ashok wrote: > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 06:24:17PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 10:51:04AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > Hi Ashok, > > > > Just a ping to make sure we're not deadlocked. I'm waiting for you, > > so I hope you're not also waiting for me :) I'm not trying to rush you; > > I just don't want to drop this by mistake. > > > Hi Bjorn > > no we aren't deadlocked :-). I didn't get around changing it to ordered > queue yet, mostly worried about having to retest all the different > combinations with ATTN, POWER_CTL, SLD. > > I'm depending on other folks to test SLD. They are tied up with other > issues ATM. > > I have had another OEM test with several disks and multiple ATTN's > pressed/cancel and current code seems to be working well so far, except the > SLD case. > > The change in the patch was only ensuring that we don't start another > POWER_ON or POWER_OFF before the earlier operation was complete. > > Would it be alright to fix SLD with this version while we can probe a clean > approach that can give us sufficient time to test a clean approach that works > with all the different combinations and OEM systems? This version avoids some SLD issues, but we can't guarantee that it is a complete solution. I don't really like to put in an incomplete solution because it reduces the urgency for doing a proper fix, and it also complicates debugging if we trip over an SLD issue we haven't seen yet during testing. Bjorn
