From: Abd-Alrhman Masalkhi <abd.masalkhi@gmail.com>
To: yu kuai <yukuai@fygo.io>,
song@kernel.org, magiclinan@didiglobal.com, xiao@kernel.org,
vverma@digitalocean.com, axboe@kernel.dk
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yukuai@fygo.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH] md/raid1: honor REQ_NOWAIT when waiting for behind writes
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2026 10:08:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m2echw1hu8.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <868207d0-d20f-42e8-8257-f57816987bf5@fygo.io>
On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 14:39 +0800, yu kuai wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 在 2026/6/22 2:08, Abd-Alrhman Masalkhi 写道:
>> What if on a partial nowait failure we just end the master bio as
>> success, but set NEEDED on that chunk's bitmap counter and start_sync()
>> picks it up for resync? That way we don't have to decide why rdev2
>> failed at all, resync just copies from rdev1 to rdev2 without nowait,
>> so if it's a real bad block, end_sync_write() records it then.
>>
>> We kinda have the idea of ending the bio before the write lands on all
>> mirrors in write-behind already, though it's not quite the same, there
>> the deferred write still lands, here we ACK after it already failed and
>> lean on resync to redo it.
>>
>> My worry is the loaded case: AGAIN under queue pressure isn't that rare,
>> so we might end up triggering resync frequently. Do you think that's
>> acceptable, or is dropping nowait better? Happy to prototype either way.
>
> Yes, AGAIN under queue pressure isn't rare, and I don't think trigger resync
> for a nowait IO failure is acceptable. This can cause lots of offline IO
> pressure which will affect disk service life. Meanwhile, resync will cause
> performance degradation for user.
>
> I still feel dropping nowait is better.
>
That makes sense. I'll drop nowait for md and post a patch.
> --
> Thanks,
> Kuai
--
Best Regards,
Abd-Alrhman
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-24 8:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-11 8:35 [PATCH] md/raid1: honor REQ_NOWAIT when waiting for behind writes Abd-Alrhman Masalkhi
2026-06-11 8:49 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-11 10:49 ` Abd-Alrhman Masalkhi
2026-06-20 20:18 ` Yu Kuai
2026-06-21 18:08 ` Abd-Alrhman Masalkhi
2026-06-24 6:39 ` yu kuai
2026-06-24 8:08 ` Abd-Alrhman Masalkhi [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=m2echw1hu8.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=abd.masalkhi@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magiclinan@didiglobal.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=vverma@digitalocean.com \
--cc=xiao@kernel.org \
--cc=yukuai@fygo.io \
/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.