On 2018/03/07 3:49, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > Tejun, > >> Except for the nit on the last patch, ata part looks good to me. >> Martin, how do you wanna route the SCSI part? > > I want to route it to /dev/null on the grounds of being a BLATANT > LAYERING VIOLATION (cue dramatic sound effect). Got it... Will add some more rework to v2. > scsi_error.c is SPC territory, we really shouldn't wedge any ZBC/SBC > stuff in there. Nor should we call into this file from libata. If > there's a ZAC/ZBC SAT retry deficiency, let's address that instead of > working around it. Understood. sd_zbc already handles the retry checks for scsi side, and almost exactly the same code is necessary from libata (since retry tests are based on sense asc/ascq and not on ATA status bits). So is it OK to export a function from sd_zbc.c to call from libata ? Replicating the code is of course trivial but rather dirty. Best regards. -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
