Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 24 Aug 2010 21:11:46 +0400 | From | Vladislav Bolkhovitin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHSET block#for-2.6.36-post] block: replace barrier with sequenced flush |
| |
Tejun Heo, on 08/23/2010 04:14 PM wrote: >> I think that's correct and changing the priority of DM_ENDIO_REQUEUE >> for REQ_FLUSH down to the lowest should be fine. >> (I didn't know that FLUSH failure implies data loss possibility.) > > At least on ATA, FLUSH failure implies that data is already lost, so > the error can't be ignored or retried.
In SCSI there are conditions when a command, including FLUSH (SYNC_CACHE), failed which don't imply lost data. For them the caller expected to retry the failed command. Most common cases are Unit Attentions and TASK QUEUE FULL status.
Vlad
| |