[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [dm-devel] RE: [RFC PATCH 4/4] convert scsi to blkerr error values

goggin, edward wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Christie [mailto:michaelc cs wisc edu] Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 4:54 PM
To: goggin, edward
Cc: axboe suse de; linux-scsi vger kernel org; dm-devel redhat com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] convert scsi to blkerr error values

Mike Christie wrote:

goggin, edward wrote:


I don't think it is reasonably possible to anticipate
all possible parsing requirements for the asc and ascq
portions of SCSI sense information across all device
models.  I'm in favor of having a "small" framework in
SCSI where a SCSI sense interpreter module (per
vendor & model possibly) could be registered
dynamically, by dm-emc.c for instance.

Yeah I agree, I mentioned this before in some other mails.

I think a
module versus some table that userspace could write to were


The BLKERR values were meant to be able to tell upper layer

code whether
a transport or device or driver error occured and whether the lower level thought it was retryable. But then I thought I could

also wedge in
the handling of the vendor specifcs by adding a vendor

specific SCSI
module that would map the their specific value to a

BLKERR_* one. And as
I said offlist it is not working perfectly becuase we are

losing some
information in the translations.

Oh yeah so the problem I am having is emc boxes may return "LUN Not Ready - Manual Intervention Required". When dm-emc.c sees this error it wants to bypass a group of paths and retry the IO but under ceratin conditions not fail those paths. So I am not sure what to return for this error. I thought if I redo my BLKERR so they describe the error like


... and set them up as a bitmap like suggested by JamesB. I could return BLKERR_MANUAL_INTERVENTION_REQ from a scsi module then have dm-emc.c evaluate that value to a dm-mpaths return value of "MP_BYPASS_PG | MP_RETRY_IO" which means bypass the priority group (group of paths) and retry the IO.

But as more vendors use dm and they cannot use existing BLKERR values I have to add more and more.

I was hoping we could avoid the need to do this by having the framework
described in my email -- the idea for which I heard about from you in
the first place :))

umm, yeah I understand this. I was writing it becuase for some reason multipath people do not post on lists and instead email me offlist, so I put this out there so I do not have to write multiple emails to people about why I do not like my original idea. :)

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]