From: Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com>
To: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
Cc: systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org >> linux-btrfs"
<linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
dsterba@suse.cz
Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] [survey] BTRFS_IOC_DEVICES_READY return status
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 21:04:53 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150612210453.3dee4563@opensuse.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <557ADBAE.9040407@oracle.com>
В Fri, 12 Jun 2015 21:16:30 +0800
Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> пишет:
>
>
> BTRFS_IOC_DEVICES_READY is to check if all the required devices
> are known by the btrfs kernel, so that admin/system-application
> could mount the FS. It is checked against a device in the argument.
>
> However the actual implementation is bit more than just that,
> in the way that it would also scan and register the device
> provided in the argument (same as btrfs device scan subcommand
> or BTRFS_IOC_SCAN_DEV ioctl).
>
> So BTRFS_IOC_DEVICES_READY ioctl isn't a read/view only ioctl,
> but its a write command as well.
>
> Next, since in the kernel we only check if total_devices
> (read from SB) is equal to num_devices (counted in the list)
> to state the status as 0 (ready) or 1 (not ready). But this
> does not work in rest of the device pool state like missing,
> seeding, replacing since total_devices is actually not equal
> to num_devices in these state but device pool is ready for
> the mount and its a bug which is not part of this discussions.
>
>
> Questions:
>
> - Do we want BTRFS_IOC_DEVICES_READY ioctl to also scan and
> register the device provided (same as btrfs device scan
> command or the BTRFS_IOC_SCAN_DEV ioctl)
> OR can BTRFS_IOC_DEVICES_READY be read-only ioctl interface
> to check the state of the device pool. ?
>
udev is using it to incrementally assemble multi-device btrfs, so in
this case I think it should. Are there any other users?
> - If the the device in the argument is already mounted,
> can it straightaway return 0 (ready) ? (as of now it would
> again independently read the SB determine total_devices
> and check against num_devices.
>
I think yes; obvious use case is btrfs mounted in initrd and later
coldplug. There is no point to wait for anything as filesystem is
obviously there.
> - What should be the expected return when the FS is mounted
> and there is a missing device.
>
This is similar to problem mdadm had to solve. mdadm starts timer as
soon as enough raid devices are present; if timer expires before raid
is complete, raid is started in degraded mode. This avoids spurious
rebuilds. So it would be good if btrfs could distinguish between enough
devices to mount and all devices.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-12 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-12 13:16 [survey] BTRFS_IOC_DEVICES_READY return status Anand Jain
2015-06-12 18:04 ` Andrei Borzenkov [this message]
2015-06-12 20:08 ` [systemd-devel] " Goffredo Baroncelli
2015-06-13 9:35 ` Anand Jain
2015-06-13 15:09 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
[not found] ` <pan$63061$a3cdf5f6$a390adbd$e6097ad9@cox.net>
2015-06-14 19:44 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2015-06-15 10:46 ` Lennart Poettering
2015-06-15 17:23 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2015-06-15 17:38 ` Lennart Poettering
2015-06-17 19:10 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2015-06-17 21:02 ` Lennart Poettering
2015-06-18 2:40 ` Andrei Borzenkov
2015-06-14 5:48 ` Andrei Borzenkov
2015-06-15 10:41 ` Lennart Poettering
2015-06-13 7:20 ` btrfs filesystem show confused when label is same as mountpoint Sjoerd
2015-06-13 9:51 ` Duncan
2015-06-25 16:37 ` David Sterba
2015-06-15 10:27 ` [survey] BTRFS_IOC_DEVICES_READY return status Lennart Poettering
2015-06-15 15:01 ` David Sterba
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=20150612210453.3dee4563@opensuse.site \
--to=arvidjaar@gmail.com \
--cc=anand.jain@oracle.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox