From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Doug Ledford Subject: Re: Implementing low level timeouts within MD Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:00:54 -0400 Message-ID: <1193425254.10336.290.camel@firewall.xsintricity.com> References: <1193418753.4771.17.camel@w100> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-yLxKUQgfvIP3H0ZnPu81" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1193418753.4771.17.camel@w100> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alberto Alonso Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids --=-yLxKUQgfvIP3H0ZnPu81 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 12:12 -0500, Alberto Alonso wrote: > I've been asking on my other posts but haven't seen > a direct reply to this question: >=20 > Can MD implement timeouts so that it detects problems when > drivers don't come back? >=20 > For me this year shall be known as "the year the array > stood still" (bad scifi reference :-) >=20 > After 4 different array failures all due to a single drive > failure I think it would really be helpful if the md code > timed out the driver. This isn't an md problem, this is a low level disk driver problem. Yell at the author of the disk driver in question. If that driver doesn't time things out and return errors up the stack in a reasonable time, then it's broken. Md should not, and realistically can not, take the place of a properly written low level driver. --=20 Doug Ledford GPG KeyID: CFBFF194 http://people.redhat.com/dledford Infiniband specific RPMs available at http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband --=-yLxKUQgfvIP3H0ZnPu81 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBHIjlmTzP9PM7pjw8RAqDKAJ0WAwn4IXiQetMwfrpU6Cq8mZCwSgCeI+EG 7WL3OhCgj7UOYg55C4NoGBI= =mkcN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-yLxKUQgfvIP3H0ZnPu81--