From: Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@gmail.com>
To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca>,
Daniel Taylor <Daniel.Taylor@wdc.com>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: breaking ext4 to test recovery
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:52:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D95F4AD.2090804@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1104011724140.3151@dhcp-27-109.brq.redhat.com>
On 04/01/2011 11:26 AM, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>
>> On 3/31/11 5:21 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>>
>>> We have a kernel patch "dev_read_only" that we use with Lustre to
>>> disable writes to the block device while the device is in use. This
>>> allows simulating crashes at arbitrary points in the code or test
>>> scripts. It was based on Andrew Morton's test harness that he used
>>> for ext3 recovery testing back when it was being ported to the 2.4
>>> kernel.
>>>
>>> http://git.whamcloud.com/?p=fs/lustre-release.git;a=blob_plain;f=lustre/kernel_patches/patches/dev_read_only-2.6.32-rhel6.patch;hb=HEAD
>>>
>>> The best part of this patch is that it works with any block device,
>>> can simulate power failure w/o any need for automated power control,
>>> and once the block device is unused (all buffers and references
>>> dropped) it can be re-activated safely.
>> It won't simulate a lost write cache though, will it?
> That's a very good question, I would like to know if there is any way at
> all to force the device to drop the write cache. That would really help
> the power failure testing filesystems.
>
> -Lukas
>
Write cache behavior can be really mysterious. Small writes (say single 4K
blocks) might stay in cache and not get written for a very long time while
large, streaming writes might bypass the write cache entirely.
It would be neat to be able to simulate these odd things for failure testing :)
Ric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-01 15:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-29 2:45 breaking ext4 to test recovery Daniel Taylor
2011-03-29 3:10 ` Tao Ma
2011-03-29 13:50 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-03-29 14:33 ` Rogier Wolff
2011-03-29 17:33 ` Greg Freemyer
2011-03-29 22:26 ` Daniel Taylor
2011-03-29 22:33 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-03-31 22:11 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-03-31 22:22 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-03-31 22:21 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-03-31 22:44 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-01 15:26 ` Lukas Czerner
2011-04-01 15:52 ` Ric Wheeler [this message]
2011-04-02 2:15 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-04-02 12:38 ` Ric Wheeler
2011-04-02 18:50 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-04-03 2:37 ` Tao Ma
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=4D95F4AD.2090804@gmail.com \
--to=ricwheeler@gmail.com \
--cc=Daniel.Taylor@wdc.com \
--cc=adilger@dilger.ca \
--cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).