From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>,
Luben Tuikov <ltuikov@yahoo.com>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"tj@kernel.org" <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: SCSI TMF processing; tag allocation
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 08:52:10 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1289832730.2233.7.camel@mulgrave.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101115144612.GA6178@parisc-linux.org>
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 07:46 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:33:15AM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> > Right, it's the clock algorithm to prevent tag starvation. If you have
> > hands representing the first and last tag and they're never allowed to
> > cross, the device can't starve any tag for too long because eventually
> > it will be the only outstanding command.
> >
> > It's not the only algorithm however. Banging down an ordered tag every
> > 200 or so commands has exactly the same effect. In fact the clock
> > algorithm was what the 53c700 driver used (before it was converted to
> > generic tags) and the ordered tag what aic7xxx uses.
> >
> > Realistically, tag starvation isn't really a problem. It was a known
> > issue for 80s era hardware. I've got some of the oldest drives on the
> > planet and I didn't see a problem when the clock algorithm was removed
> > from 53c700.
>
> The problem is that each driver is solving the problem in its own way
> right now, which is clearly daft. And no drive manufactured in the past
> fifteen years supports ordered tags anyway, so they're only a placebo
> at this point.
Actually, most drivers ignore the issue ... which is why I don't think
there's much of a problem. The aic7xxx is the only one I know doing
something about this. Like I said, I removed the clock algorithm from
53c700 and haven't had a problem (yet, I suppose).
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-15 14:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-06 6:02 Luben Tuikov
2010-11-13 12:37 ` Matthew Wilcox
2010-11-15 9:28 ` Jens Axboe
2010-11-15 14:33 ` James Bottomley
2010-11-15 14:40 ` Alan Cox
2010-11-15 14:53 ` James Bottomley
2010-11-15 14:46 ` Matthew Wilcox
2010-11-15 14:52 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2010-11-16 20:28 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2010-11-15 18:53 ` Douglas Gilbert
2010-11-15 19:09 ` Matthew Wilcox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1289832730.2233.7.camel@mulgrave.site \
--to=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltuikov@yahoo.com \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome