From owner-cvs-all Tue Jan 19 23:11:36 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA15328 for cvs-all-outgoing; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:11:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from feral-gw.feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA15320; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:11:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from localhost (mjacob@localhost) by feral-gw.feral.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA22961; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:11:10 -0800 Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:11:10 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Jacob X-Sender: mjacob@feral-gw Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: "Kenneth D. Merry" cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/cam cam_xpt.c In-Reply-To: <199901200401.VAA00607@panzer.plutotech.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > > Now, we should modify scsi_da to cope dynamically with this. > > I'm not sure I understand...we already dynamically reduce the number of > outstanding tags whenever a drive sends queue full. Some drives, though, > tend to lock up when they get to a queue full condition. Yes, that's true. Sorry- I wasn't thinking clearly. It is just that retrofitting for breakage is a losing game. It might make more sense to limit tags to something lower *unless* there's a quirks that says this drive can take a lot. By and large I'd really wonder that > 8 per spindle makes any sense at all. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message