Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] pvSCSI: Sanity check for REPORT_LUN emulation

[Steven Smith <steven.smith@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> Sorry for delay.
Don't worry about it; I'm just as bad.

> > > I will attach a patch in order to provide following.
> > > 
> > > - Sanity check for REPORT_LUN emulation.
> > Thank you, that's much better.
> > 
> > I have one slight issue with the new approach: if a REPORT_LUNS
> > command races with a LUN hot-add on the backend, you tell the frontend
> > that the command failed.  Might it be better to instead retry the
> > command on the backend?
> > 
> > It's pretty unlikely that anyone would actually hit this race, and the
> > current behaviour isn't completely unreasonable, but it seems like
> > retrying in the backend would be a bit more robust.  What do you
> > think?
> Yes, I consider retrying is a right way, because we can expect few 
> times retrying will certainly succeed in this case.
> I will attach a patch with the number of retry is three. How do you
> think three times retry is appropriate?
The patch looks fine.  Three retries sounds pretty reasonable; failing
once is unlikely, so failing four times in a row shouldn't really
happen unless there's something else wrong.

(Famous last words :)).

Steven.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel