linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Question about handle_failed_sync()
@ 2012-03-14  7:16 majianpeng
  2012-03-14  7:28 ` NeilBrown
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: majianpeng @ 2012-03-14  7:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Neil Brown; +Cc: linux-raid

 In function handle_failed_sync():
>>/* During recovery devices cannot be removed, so locking and
>>	 * refcounting of rdevs is not needed
>>	 */
>>	for (i = 0; i < conf->raid_disks; i++) {
>>		struct md_rdev *rdev = conf->disks[i].rdev;
>>		if (rdev
>>		    && !test_bit(Faulty, &rdev->flags)
>>		    && !test_bit(In_sync, &rdev->flags)
>>		    && !rdev_set_badblocks(rdev, sh->sector,
>>					   STRIPE_SECTORS, 0))
>>			abort = 1;

I have two questions:
1:if raid have two or more spare disks, it wil set bad block on all spare disk. Is it worth it?
2:If raid have two or more spare disks,I can remove spare disks which not working for recovery.Then you shold add locking 
   and refconting.
 				
--------------
majianpeng
2012-03-14


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2012-03-14  7:28 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-03-14  7:16 Question about handle_failed_sync() majianpeng
2012-03-14  7:28 ` NeilBrown

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).