Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 08:32:38 -0800 (PST) From: mjacob@freebsd.org To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org, mjacob@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CAM rescanner thread? Message-ID: <20070216083124.Q17178@ns1.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <45D535E4.60609@samsco.org> References: <20070104225519.Q92958@ns1.feral.com> <459E8AE7.90104@samsco.org> <20070105093930.Y34456@ns1.feral.com> <459E97E6.4000603@samsco.org> <459E989C.2020602@samsco.org> <20070105103431.A34456@ns1.feral.com> <20070105104021.D34456@ns1.feral.com> <45A9225D.4080907@scsiguy.com> <20070215145657.N45611@ns1.feral.com> <45D4F7C8.7050903@samsco.org> <20070215175554.X56445@ns1.feral.com> <45D535E4.60609@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The goal was to create sys/cam/scsi/scsi_probe.c and start divorcing the > SCSI knowledge from the XPT. Having it be a thread was just a side > effect. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to finish that work yet. > It's getting closer, though. But seriously, I saw little specific > benefit to it being a separate thread rather than part of the camisr. > Scanning/probing doesn't block, so it's not like it's blocking the > camisr from processing other I/O. It's just nice from a modularity > standpoint. You can do mallocs. It's true that scanning/probing doesn't block, but it really has to be started from process context. I see an advantage in it as a response to initiating a rescan from Fibre Channel events. It makes the multipath stuff work usefully. D'ya mind if I put it in as an interim?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070216083124.Q17178>