From: Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>
To: dm-devel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: 答复: Re: [PATCH] multipath-tools: improve processing efficiency for addition and deletion of multipath devices
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:08:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1487588902.4446.7.camel@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201702171124101816133@zte.com.cn>
Hello Tang,
> In the second case, we know all events in the sequence have the
> same
> > WWID; in this case I think it would be safe to filter away "remove"
> > events by subsequent "add" events, ending up with "add path1| add
> > path2| remove path3". But I may be overlooking something here.
>
> > The dangerous thing if you have simultaneous remove and add events
> for
> > the same LUN is that processing the "add" events is likely to fail
> in
> > domap(). If you get "add path1 | remove path2", once you process
> "add
> > path1", "path2" may not exist in the kernel any more, and "domap"
> will
> > fail if you try to set up both; you may end up removing the map
> > completely. IMHO the only safe way to process events in this
> situation
> > is to merge the events into a single domap() call.
>
> "case 2: remove path1 |add path1 |remove path2 |add path2 |remove
> path3"
> Since the mergering is starting from the latest to the eariest
> uevent, so the
> uevent "remove path3" try to merger other uevents, if we do not stop
> mergering,
> uevent "remove path3" would merge uevent "remove path2" and uevent
> "remove path1". Uevent "add path2" would merge "add path1".
> The result is that we get two merged uevents:
> 1) add path2, path1
> 2) remove path3, path2, path1
> Then we process the merged uevents from the earlier to later, We try
> to ”add
> path2 path1“, and we would create or reload a map device with path1
> and path2.
> Next we process ” remove path3, path2, path1“, so path1, path2 and
> path3 are
> all removed from the map device, this is wrong, the correct result
> is that the path1
> and path2 should be still in the map device.
I don't understand that. This would mean that you'd re-order "remove
path1 | add path1" into "add path1| remove path1", and the same for
path2. That may obviously never happen. Your "stop merging" logic
forbids it, and that's fine for me for now.
Regards
Martin
--
Dr. Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>, Tel. +49 (0)911 74053 2107
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-20 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-17 3:24 答复: Re: [PATCH] multipath-tools: improve processing efficiency for addition and deletion of multipath devices tang.junhui
2017-02-17 6:32 ` Benjamin Marzinski
2017-02-17 11:40 ` Martin Wilck
2017-02-20 11:08 ` Martin Wilck [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-02-21 5:34 tang.junhui
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1487588902.4446.7.camel@suse.com \
--to=mwilck@suse.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.