Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:22:22 +0100 | From | Lars Marowsky-Bree <> | Subject | Re: dm core patches |
| |
On 2004-02-13T11:44:41, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com> said:
> - fatal: error cannot be retried > - retryable: error may be retried > > and possibly > > - informational: This is dangerous, since it's giving information about > a transaction that actually succeeded (i.e. we'd need to fix drivers to > recognise it as being uptodate but with info, like sector remapped)
I don't think we need informational errors. The meaning of this seems pretty difficult to define, and it's bound to have annoying semantics. I also can't come up with a case where you would want to use that ;-)
> Then, we also have a error origin indication: > > - device: The device is actually reporting the problem > - transport: the error is a transport error > - driver: the error comes from the device driver. > > So dm would know that fatal transport or driver errors could be > repathed, but fatal device errors probably couldn't. > > Any that I've missed?
No, I think those were the ones which we were discussing at KS2003 too.
Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb@suse.de>
-- High Availability & Clustering \ ever tried. ever failed. no matter. SUSE Labs | try again. fail again. fail better. Research & Development, SUSE LINUX AG \ -- Samuel Beckett
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |