From: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
ed.ciechanowski@intel.com, marcin.labun@intel.com,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] md: make recovery started by do_md_run() visible via sync_action
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:17:23 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091230151723.4c5e31de@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091230123714.6c1c8571@notabene.brown>
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:37:14 +1100
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:18:36 -0700
> Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > By default md_do_sync() will perform recovery if no other actions are
> > specified. However, action_show() relies on MD_RECOVERY_RECOVER to be
> > set otherwise it returns 'idle'. So, add a missing set
> > MD_RECOVERY_RECOVER when starting recovery.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > ---
> > Hi Neil,
> >
> > One more to finish off recovery checkpoint support. Without this mdmon
> > never notices that the array was rebuilding and never marks the
> > completion. I did not see any urgency to workaround this in the mdadm
> > patchset, but let me know if you think a "kernel version > 2.6.33-rcX"
> > check is warranted.
>
> Thanks Dan.
> This is "obviously correct" and I have queued it.
> However...
> I wonder if we want that code in do_md_run at all.
> It claims to be there because if we leave the recovery to
> md_check_recovery, then it will remove and re-add the spares,
> and this will lose the recovery_offset information.
>
> However presumably the same problem applies to recovery_offset
> information that we set manually. Won't the call to
> remove_and_add_spares() lose that information too?
>
> I think we need to make sure that remove_and_add_spares
> doesn't lose information that we want to keep, and then
> remove this code from do_md_run.
>
> So my first question is: did the current code really work for you?
> It looks like it would zero recovery_offset in remove_and_add_spares ??
I figured it out myself.
Since commit dfc7064500061677720fa26352963c772d3ebe6b (2.6.26)
->hot_remove_disk will refuse to remove devices that are not failed, unless
recovery is impossible.
So since then, this code in do_md_run is not needed.
I'll remove it.
NeilBrown
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-30 4:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-22 1:18 [PATCH] md: make recovery started by do_md_run() visible via sync_action Dan Williams
2009-12-30 1:37 ` Neil Brown
2009-12-30 4:17 ` Neil Brown [this message]
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=20091230151723.4c5e31de@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=ed.ciechanowski@intel.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcin.labun@intel.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.