From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jul 13 01:29:39 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id BAA24883 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 13 Jul 1995 01:29:39 -0700 Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id BAA24872 ; Thu, 13 Jul 1995 01:29:35 -0700 Received: (from jkh@localhost) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id BAA02990; Thu, 13 Jul 1995 01:29:10 -0700 Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 01:29:10 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Message-Id: <199507130829.BAA02990@time.cdrom.com> To: Karl Denninger Cc: tom@misery.sdf.com (Tom Samplonius), rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SCSI disk wedge In-Reply-To: <199507130143.UAA00551@Jupiter.mcs.net> References: <199507130143.UAA00551@Jupiter.mcs.net> Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk Karl Denninger writes: > If FreeBSD is going to be a production platform then it is going to have to > start behaving like one. This means that pushing things off on drive > vendors is not acceptable. Please, Tom doesn't necessarily speak for the FreeBSD Project! We agree that a problem is a problem, and finger pointing avails us nothing. > If you have a problem with a device, you *report it*. Silent death is never > acceptable. The kernel is running in this case, but the system is hung > waiting on I/O completion. This is one area in which the SCSI code needs significant improvement; no argument at all about that and we've known it for some time. Finding people willing to go in there with a flashlight hunting for unhandled error conditions and such is the more difficult problem. Jordan