From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To: Bob Liu <bob.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Allison Henderson <allison.henderson@oracle.com>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
martin.petersen@oracle.com, shirley.ma@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/7] Block/XFS: Support alternative mirror device retry
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 20:30:15 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181210043015.GS24487@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f7bf5329-e756-1edb-af3f-41aca02691fe@oracle.com>
On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 10:49:44PM +0800, Bob Liu wrote:
> On 11/28/18 3:45 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 04:33:03PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >> - how does propagation through stacked layers work?
> >
> > The only way it works is by each layering driving it. Thus my
> > recommendation above bilding on your earlier one to use an index
> > that is filled by the driver at I/O completion time.
> >
> > E.g.
> >
> > bio_init: bi_leg = -1
> >
> > raid1: submit bio to lower driver
> > raid 1 completion: set bi_leg to 0 or 1
> >
> > Now if we want to allow stacking we need to save/restore bi_leg
> > before submitting to the underlying device. Which is possible,
> > but quite a bit of work in the drivers.
> >
>
> I found it's still very challenge while writing the code.
> save/restore bi_leg may not enough because the drivers don't know how to do fs-metadata verify.
>
> E.g two layer raid1 stacking
>
> fs: md0(copies:2)
> / \
> layer1/raid1 md1(copies:2) md2(copies:2)
> / \ / \
> layer2/raid1 dev0 dev1 dev2 dev3
>
> Assume dev2 is corrupted
> => md2: don't know how to do fs-metadata verify.
> => md0: fs verify fail, retry md1(preserve md2).
> Then md2 will never be retried even dev3 may also has the right copy.
> Unless the upper layer device(md0) can know the amount of copy is 4 instead of 2?
> And need a way to handle the mapping.
> Did I miss something? Thanks!
<shrug> It seems reasonable to me that the raid1 layer should set the
number of retries to (number of raid1 mirrors) * min(retry count of all
mirrors) so that the upper layer device (md0) would advertise 4 retry
possibilities instead of 2.
--D
> -Bob
>
> >> - is it generic/abstract enough to be able to work with
> >> RAID5/6 to trigger verification/recovery from the parity
> >> information in the stripe?
> >
> > If we get the non -1 bi_leg for paritity raid this is an inidicator
> > that parity rebuild needs to happen. For multi-parity setups we could
> > also use different levels there.
> >
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-10 4:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-28 3:49 [RFC PATCH v1 0/7] Block/XFS: Support alternative mirror device retry Allison Henderson
2018-11-28 3:49 ` [PATCH v1 1/7] block: add nr_mirrors to request_queue Allison Henderson
2018-11-28 3:49 ` [PATCH v1 2/7] block: expand write_hint of bio/request to rw_hint Allison Henderson
2018-11-28 3:49 ` [PATCH v1 3/7] md: raid1: handle bi_rw_hint accordingly Allison Henderson
2018-11-28 3:49 ` [PATCH v1 4/7] xfs: Add b_rw_hint to xfs_buf Allison Henderson
2018-11-28 5:03 ` Dave Chinner
2018-11-28 3:49 ` [PATCH v1 5/7] xfs: Add device retry Allison Henderson
2018-11-28 5:08 ` Dave Chinner
2018-11-28 5:22 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-11-28 5:38 ` Dave Chinner
2018-11-28 7:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-28 12:41 ` Bob Liu
2018-11-28 16:47 ` Allison Henderson
2018-11-28 3:49 ` [PATCH v1 6/7] xfs: Rewrite retried read Allison Henderson
2018-11-28 5:17 ` Dave Chinner
2018-11-28 5:26 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-11-28 5:40 ` Dave Chinner
2018-11-28 3:49 ` [PATCH v1 7/7] xfs: Add tracepoints and logging to alternate device retry Allison Henderson
2018-11-28 5:33 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/7] Block/XFS: Support alternative mirror " Dave Chinner
2018-11-28 5:49 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-11-28 6:30 ` Dave Chinner
2018-11-28 7:15 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-11-28 19:38 ` Andreas Dilger
2018-11-28 7:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-28 7:46 ` Dave Chinner
2018-11-28 7:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-28 7:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-12-08 14:49 ` Bob Liu
2018-12-10 4:30 ` Darrick J. Wong [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=20181210043015.GS24487@magnolia \
--to=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=allison.henderson@oracle.com \
--cc=bob.liu@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=shirley.ma@oracle.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).