From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 16 02:33:20 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C230916A402 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2007 02:33:20 +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 8D03013C428 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2007 02:33:20 +0000 (UTC) (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 l1G1uEVg057312; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:56:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mjacob@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost (mjacob@localhost) by ns1.feral.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) with ESMTP id l1G1uDwV057309; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:56:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mjacob@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: ns1.feral.com: mjacob owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:56:13 -0800 (PST) From: mjacob@freebsd.org To: Scott Long In-Reply-To: <45D4F7C8.7050903@samsco.org> Message-ID: <20070215175554.X56445@ns1.feral.com> 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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CAM rescanner thread? X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: mjacob@freebsd.org List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 02:33:20 -0000 And you didn't check it in because....? On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Scott Long wrote: > Matthew Jacob wrote: >> >> Following up from this, belatedly, I see lots of good stuff, and: >> >> >>> With the discovery process moved to a >>> thread and some augmentation to XPT_SCAN_*, we should be good enough >>> for now. >> >> So, in principle a thread for rescanning seems appropriate to you? >> >> -matt >> > > I've had various prototypes of this in the past. > > Scott > >