From: "Christoph Hellwig (hch@infradead.org)" <hch@infradead.org>
To: "Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" <Elliott@hp.com>
Cc: KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
James Bottomley <jbottomley@parallels.com>,
"michaelc@cs.wisc.edu" <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>,
"Christoph Hellwig (hch@infradead.org)" <hch@infradead.org>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"jasowang@redhat.com" <jasowang@redhat.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"ohering@suse.com" <ohering@suse.com>,
"apw@canonical.com" <apw@canonical.com>,
"devel@linuxdriverproject.org" <devel@linuxdriverproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] [SCSI] Fix a bug in deriving the FLUSH_TIMEOUT from the basic I/O timeout
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 08:11:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140718151131.GB7425@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <94D0CD8314A33A4D9D801C0FE68B402958BAC6DC@G9W0745.americas.hpqcorp.net>
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:51:06AM +0000, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) wrote:
> SYNCHRONIZE CACHE (16) should be favored over SYNCHRONIZE
> CACHE (10) unless SYNCHRONIZE CACHE (10) is not supported.
I gues you mean (16) for the last occurance? What's the benefit of
using SYNCHRONIZE CACHE (16) if we don't pass a LBA range?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-18 15:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-04 16:33 K. Y. Srinivasan
2014-06-04 17:02 ` James Bottomley
2014-06-04 17:15 ` KY Srinivasan
2014-06-06 1:32 ` Mike Christie
2014-06-06 2:53 ` KY Srinivasan
2014-06-06 17:18 ` Mike Christie
2014-06-06 17:52 ` James Bottomley
2014-06-06 18:22 ` Jens Axboe
2014-06-20 21:36 ` KY Srinivasan
2014-07-17 23:53 ` KY Srinivasan
2014-07-18 0:51 ` Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-07-18 15:11 ` Christoph Hellwig (hch@infradead.org) [this message]
2014-07-18 15:39 ` James Bottomley
2014-07-18 17:17 ` Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-07-18 17:41 ` James Bottomley
2014-07-18 18:16 ` Douglas Gilbert
2014-07-18 15:10 ` Christoph Hellwig (hch@infradead.org)
2014-07-18 16:44 ` KY Srinivasan
2014-07-18 16:57 ` James Bottomley
2014-07-18 17:01 ` hch
2014-07-18 17:05 ` KY Srinivasan
2014-07-18 17:12 ` hch
2014-07-18 17:15 ` hch
2014-07-18 17:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-07-18 17:03 ` James Bottomley
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=20140718151131.GB7425@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=Elliott@hp.com \
--cc=apw@canonical.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=devel@linuxdriverproject.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=jbottomley@parallels.com \
--cc=kys@microsoft.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
--cc=ohering@suse.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®