From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bart Van Assche Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 2/8] sd: Return SUCCESS in sd_eh_action() after device offline Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 23:54:08 +0000 Message-ID: <1491868447.4199.30.camel@sandisk.com> References: <1491485796-44411-1-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> <1491485796-44411-3-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from esa5.hgst.iphmx.com ([216.71.153.144]:58115 "EHLO esa5.hgst.iphmx.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751862AbdDJXyN (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Apr 2017 19:54:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1491485796-44411-3-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> Content-Language: en-US Content-ID: Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: "hare@suse.de" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" Cc: "hch@lst.de" , "james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "bblock@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "hare@suse.com" On Thu, 2017-04-06 at 15:36 +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > If sd_eh_action() decides to take the device offline there is > no point in returning FAILED, as taking the device offline > is the ultimate step in SCSI EH anyway. > So further escalation via SCSI EH is not likely to make a > difference and we can as well return SUCCESS. Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche =