From: Mike Accetta <maccetta@laurelnetworks.com>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: detecting read errors after RAID1 check operation
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:27:21 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15506.1187234841@mdt.ecitele.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:55:14 +1000." <18115.33874.732489.977468@notabene.brown>
Neil Brown writes:
> On Wednesday August 15, maccetta@laurelnetworks.com wrote:
> >
> > There are already files like /sys/block/md_d0/md/dev-sdb/errors in /sys
> > which would be very convenient to consult but according to the kernel
> > driver implementation the error counts reported there are apparently
> > for corrected errors and not relevant for read errors during a "check"
> > operation.
> >
>
> When 'check' hits a read error, an attempt is made to 'correct' it by
> over-writing with correct data. This will either increase the
> 'errors' count or fail the drive completely.
>
> What 'check' doesn't do (and 'repair' does) it react when it find that
> successful reads of all drives (in a raid1) do not match.
>
> So just use the 'errors' number - it is exactly what you want.
This happens in our old friend sync_request_write()? I'm dealing with
simulated errors and will dig further to make sure that is not perturbing
the results but I don't see any 'errors' effect. This is with our
patched 2.6.20 raid1.c. The logic doesn't seem to be any different in
2.6.22 from what I can tell, though.
This fragment
if (j < 0 || test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_CHECK, &mddev->recovery)) {
sbio->bi_end_io = NULL;
rdev_dec_pending(conf->mirrors[i].rdev, mddev);
} else {
/* fixup the bio for reuse */
...
}
looks suspicously like any correction attempt for 'check' is being
short-circuited to me, regardless of whether or not there was a read
error. Actually, even if the rewrite was not being short-circuited,
I still don't see the path that would update 'corrected_errors' in this
case. There are only two raid1.c sites that touch 'corrected_errors', one
is in fix_read_errors() and the other is later in sync_request_write().
With my limited understanding of how this all works, neither of these
paths would seem to apply here.
--
Mike Accetta
ECI Telecom Ltd.
Transport Networking Division, US (previously Laurel Networks)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-16 3:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-15 22:03 detecting read errors after RAID1 check operation Mike Accetta
2007-08-15 22:55 ` Neil Brown
2007-08-16 3:27 ` Mike Accetta [this message]
2007-08-17 2:09 ` Neil Brown
2007-08-17 21:31 ` Mike Accetta
2007-08-25 14:27 ` Mike Snitzer
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=15506.1187234841@mdt.ecitele.com \
--to=maccetta@laurelnetworks.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/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).