From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 057863B777F; Wed, 17 Jun 2026 16:54:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781715283; cv=none; b=pwJYDdaBZ1NwnUK5kv2IVa3GhHEMvQfKa+OYTj18Yc9465Gb5NQO+nnraxfsfUK4d5xUCwv4EEwGcTcBqFbPQC3bTEopuQVOFKKd7BWRWt76K1N/Ypw3W/bId8CwAxezxJfS0XqUqcz0D4TpkraGaWXl8RBlYQWOid2gamGY/DQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781715283; c=relaxed/simple; bh=o3WUJ/eNJk6R+/NNqNLMdwE5ozkdzguccRMv92lhDxY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Cb078vK+gX0nGu3v9bmk1liTT2mwMvL61G1sruMPO4eU21czA2DxrkYm1oKU/Q3Yj3n1iykelDg3Iq8pT5HIfoMgQy25EBNLJ4PjwFnKJBRmCdGGoJVg/So8/EBKfJl4AU4As/uFhno3wr+M1JuNxxlwmZ93tkpHCNvkzaCEWmE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=WY+S5E0j; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="WY+S5E0j" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 126081F000E9; Wed, 17 Jun 2026 16:54:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1781715280; bh=o3WUJ/eNJk6R+/NNqNLMdwE5ozkdzguccRMv92lhDxY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=WY+S5E0jtX6KCqBOdBzQ2G67O39yAzVKNZKDLneoY7hQ36OTl5bBgrAi/a0LtRXxz JqD3EfSB0s4slreCmFO3ipNWOjPDAlZWly+BIu3UXqY6vigdvU+qLCRNQCcZQ9gTr2 CldBjLyo/808wk6cvcBBQXmelwWaZLtwa/ZfzZOX84eEu42sj8ENr1NxNpp1A1+5Jr xTYzv8iX3Zlov7VDSwOMdliIyEyEHYwWAhQSi+u5E+66JNtAWBvpPZoZgxxVAw48f3 h2Xxt+mM8QNFqsmVe6BlPqDJ1NhyBGnovqP1r/M+h+vjJdMCRy+OxX1cZFV5Wjc9bV 22tE2Ff336g9w== Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2026 10:54:38 -0600 From: Keith Busch To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: Keith Busch , dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, mpatocka@redhat.com, Vjaceslavs Klimovs Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dm-raid1: don't fail the mirror for invalid I/O errors Message-ID: References: <20260616150554.1686662-1-kbusch@meta.com> <20260616150554.1686662-2-kbusch@meta.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 04:44:35PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > (It's a bit scary you're having to go around quite > a few places and make similar fixes; I assume there > are others that do similar things). Yes, I understand that. I'm looking into a common way to validate this. The md raid doesn't have this problem because they always call bio_split_to_limits() first, but that's not an optimal thing to do for dm raid in the normal read/write path, so perhaps a common checker needs to happen generically in the block layer. Yeah, I know I removed the previous higher level validation ... I'll try find something less costly than what we had before.