From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 21 14:01:55 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 103261065698 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 14:01:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C47988FC12 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 14:01:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o9LE1kMB065282; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:01:46 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Scott Long In-Reply-To: <4CC046B8.8000505@feral.com> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:01:46 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <422A732A-355A-4C18-9E8F-8C7D2EE9D122@samsco.org> References: <20101019221131.GA75368@freebsd.org> <63EF6D51-1196-43F1-8521-27756E972263@samsco.org> <20101021062150.GA20489@freebsd.org> <8B967C79-CD84-435C-9007-E33467DC92A9@samsco.org> <20101021135447.GC72290@freebsd.org> <4CC046B8.8000505@feral.com> To: Matthew Jacob X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-50.0 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 (2010-01-18) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: set kern.cam.scsi_delay to 2000ms on all platforms X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 14:01:55 -0000 Sure, but what's the plan for validating it? Too often this stuff goes = into HEAD with the best of intentions, and then it basically never = touched again until someone stumbles over it in an release. I'm not = against this change, I just want to know what engineering has gone into = it. Scott On Oct 21, 2010, at 7:57 AM, Matthew Jacob wrote: > Now would be a good time to find out if there are issues. >=20 >> On Thu Oct 21 10, Scott Long wrote: >>> Ok, I've gotta be a stick in the mud and ask you how you've come to = the conclusion that 2000 is better than 5000. Can you provide your = evidence and/or testing results? >=20 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi > To unsubscribe, send any mail to = "freebsd-scsi-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"