From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep 26 16:00:47 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: scsi@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE15516A49E
	for <scsi@freebsd.org>; Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:00:47 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from mjacob@freebsd.org)
Received: from ns1.feral.com (ns1.feral.com [192.67.166.1])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A581D43D45
	for <scsi@freebsd.org>; Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:00:46 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from mjacob@freebsd.org)
Received: from ns1.feral.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by ns1.feral.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id k8QG0kCh098086
	for <scsi@freebsd.org>; Tue, 26 Sep 2006 09:00:46 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from mjacob@freebsd.org)
Received: from localhost (mjacob@localhost)
	by ns1.feral.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) with ESMTP id k8QG0k7F098083
	for <scsi@freebsd.org>; Tue, 26 Sep 2006 09:00:46 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from mjacob@freebsd.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: ns1.feral.com: mjacob owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 09:00:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: mjacob@freebsd.org
X-X-Sender: mjacob@ns1.feral.com
To: scsi@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20060926085839.Q98053@ns1.feral.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: 
Subject: hysteresis for CAM_RESRC_UNAVAIL
X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mjacob@freebsd.org
List-Id: SCSI subsystem <freebsd-scsi.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-scsi-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-scsi>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-scsi-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-scsi-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:00:47 -0000


This showed up on one of the lists- we just retrt BUSY and 
CAM_RESRC_UNAVAIL right away.

Below is a patch where I added a half second delay between retries. Does 
this seem okay and/or should it be longer delays as the timeout count 
goes down? Should BUSY be included?

Index: cam_periph.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/cam/cam_periph.c,v
retrieving revision 1.62
diff -u -r1.62 cam_periph.c
--- cam_periph.c	24 May 2006 15:22:21 -0000	1.62
+++ cam_periph.c	26 Sep 2006 15:54:52 -0000
@@ -1699,6 +1699,12 @@
  		}
  		break;
  	case CAM_RESRC_UNAVAIL:
+		/*
+		 * Wait a half second for the resource shortage to abate.
+		 */
+		relsim_flags = RELSIM_RELEASE_AFTER_TIMEOUT;
+		timeout = 500;
+		/* FALLTHROUGH */
  	case CAM_BUSY:
  		/* timeout??? */
  	default: