[Top] [All Lists]

Re: e100 "Ferguson" release

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: e100 "Ferguson" release
From: David Brownell <david-b@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 10:38:17 -0700
Cc: greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx, scott.feldman@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20030803211333.12839f66.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <C6F5CF431189FA4CBAEC9E7DD5441E010222927D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3F2CA65F.8060105@xxxxxxxxx> <3F2CBA71.2070503@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030803003239.4257ef24.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <3F2DCE56.6030601@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20030803200851.7d46a605.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <3F2DD6BD.7070504@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20030803204642.684c6075.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <3F2DDC3A.2040707@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20030803211333.12839f66.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20030225
David S. Miller wrote:

For example, what do USB block device drivers do when -ENOMEM comes
back?  Do they just drop the request on the floor?  No, rather they
resubmit the request later without the scsi/block layer knowing
anything about what happened, right?

I didn't notice any code to retry, but I did see some that morphed
ENOMEM into a generic scsi "error".  Scsi presumably does something
more or less intelligent then.

The network layer on the other hand _does_ have hooks for retrying,
not that they're used much.

- Dave

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>