Re: dm core patches

[Lars Marowsky-Bree]

On 2004-02-13T11:44:41,
   James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxx>

-- 
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/