From: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
ed.ciechanowski@intel.com, marcin.labun@intel.com,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] md: make recovery started by do_md_run() visible via sync_action
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:17:23 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091230151723.4c5e31de@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091230123714.6c1c8571@notabene.brown>
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:37:14 +1100
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:18:36 -0700
> Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > By default md_do_sync() will perform recovery if no other actions are
> > specified. However, action_show() relies on MD_RECOVERY_RECOVER to be
> > set otherwise it returns 'idle'. So, add a missing set
> > MD_RECOVERY_RECOVER when starting recovery.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > ---
> > Hi Neil,
> >
> > One more to finish off recovery checkpoint support. Without this mdmon
> > never notices that the array was rebuilding and never marks the
> > completion. I did not see any urgency to workaround this in the mdadm
> > patchset, but let me know if you think a "kernel version > 2.6.33-rcX"
> > check is warranted.
>
> Thanks Dan.
> This is "obviously correct" and I have queued it.
> However...
> I wonder if we want that code in do_md_run at all.
> It claims to be there because if we leave the recovery to
> md_check_recovery, then it will remove and re-add the spares,
> and this will lose the recovery_offset information.
>
> However presumably the same problem applies to recovery_offset
> information that we set manually. Won't the call to
> remove_and_add_spares() lose that information too?
>
> I think we need to make sure that remove_and_add_spares
> doesn't lose information that we want to keep, and then
> remove this code from do_md_run.
>
> So my first question is: did the current code really work for you?
> It looks like it would zero recovery_offset in remove_and_add_spares ??
I figured it out myself.
Since commit dfc7064500061677720fa26352963c772d3ebe6b (2.6.26)
->hot_remove_disk will refuse to remove devices that are not failed, unless
recovery is impossible.
So since then, this code in do_md_run is not needed.
I'll remove it.
NeilBrown
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-30 4:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-22 1:18 [PATCH] md: make recovery started by do_md_run() visible via sync_action Dan Williams
2009-12-30 1:37 ` Neil Brown
2009-12-30 4:17 ` Neil Brown [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=20091230151723.4c5e31de@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=ed.ciechanowski@intel.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcin.labun@intel.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).