linux-kernel - RE: Drivers: scsi: FLUSH timeout

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 4 Oct 2013 15:02:18 +0000
From:	KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>
To:	Eric Seppanen <eric@...estorage.com>,
	"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Drivers: scsi: FLUSH timeout



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Seppanen [mailto:eric@...estorage.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 1:49 PM
> To: Nicholas A. Bellinger
> Cc: KY Srinivasan; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; devel@...uxdriverproject.org;
> linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: Drivers: scsi: FLUSH timeout
> 
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger
> <nab@...ux-iscsi.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 18:29 +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote:
> > > Ideally, I want this to be adjustable like the way we can change the I/O
> timeout.
> > > Since that has been attempted earlier and rejected (not clear what the
> reasons were),
> > > I was suggesting that we pick a larger number. James, let me know how I
> should proceed here.
> > >
> >
> > I think the objection was to making a module parameter for doing this
> > globally for all struct scsi_disk, and not the idea of making it
> > adjustable on an individual basis per-say..
> >
> > What about adding a /sys/class/scsi_disk/$HCTL/flush_timeout..?
> 
> Do I/O timeouts and flush timeouts need to be independently adjusted?
> If you're having trouble with slow operations, it seems likely to be
> across the board.
> 
> Flush timeout could be defined as 2x the read/write timeout.  Any
> other command-specific timeouts could be scaled the same way.

I like this idea and would result in minimal changes. James, if it ok with you,
I could send you the patch.

Regards,

K. Y
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/