Re: cvs commit: src/sys/cam/scsi scsi_cd.c
> In message <20031006093515.S3158_at_root.org>, Nate Lawson writes:
>> Shouldn't the following read capacity command be able to detect the loss
>> of a drive as well?
> The trick here is the low timeout.
No. The trick is removing any retries so that retriable errors
are ignored. The "problem" never was the timeout value, but the
drive returning "in the process of becoming ready" status that
triggered error recovery to wait for the device. GEOM shouldn't
be waiting around for devices unless they are accessed or have
the potential to be accessed (devfs lookup that fails to match
an already probed entry) which would avoid this delay even with
the original, correct error recovery.
>> Did kdm_at_ review this?
> If he had, it would have said so in the commit message.
If he had, I'm sure he would have rejected the change.
Received on Tue Oct 07 2003 - 11:45:33 UTC