From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
To: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [md PATCH 02/18] md/raid1, raid10: don't recheck "Faulty" flag in read-balance.
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 16:19:52 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160602061952.2939.41358.stgit@noble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160602061319.2939.72280.stgit@noble>
Re-checking the faulty flag here brings no value.
The comment about "risk" refers to the risk that the device could
be in the process of being removed by ->hot_remove_disk().
However providing that the ->nr_pending count is incremented inside
an rcu_read_locked() region, there is no risk of that happening.
This is because the rdev pointer (in the personalities array) is set
to NULL before synchronize_rcu(), and ->nr_pending is tested
afterwards. If the rcu_read_locked region happens before the
synchronize_rcu(), the test will see that nr_pending has been incremented.
If it happens afterwards, the rdev pointer will be NULL so there is nothing
to increment.
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
---
drivers/md/raid1.c | 7 -------
drivers/md/raid10.c | 8 --------
2 files changed, 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1.c b/drivers/md/raid1.c
index c7c8cde0ab21..a54edbe741ff 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid1.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid1.c
@@ -689,13 +689,6 @@ static int read_balance(struct r1conf *conf, struct r1bio *r1_bio, int *max_sect
if (!rdev)
goto retry;
atomic_inc(&rdev->nr_pending);
- if (test_bit(Faulty, &rdev->flags)) {
- /* cannot risk returning a device that failed
- * before we inc'ed nr_pending
- */
- rdev_dec_pending(rdev, conf->mddev);
- goto retry;
- }
sectors = best_good_sectors;
if (conf->mirrors[best_disk].next_seq_sect != this_sector)
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid10.c b/drivers/md/raid10.c
index c7de2a53e625..cc9e3813e1a4 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid10.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c
@@ -707,7 +707,6 @@ static struct md_rdev *read_balance(struct r10conf *conf,
raid10_find_phys(conf, r10_bio);
rcu_read_lock();
-retry:
sectors = r10_bio->sectors;
best_slot = -1;
best_rdev = NULL;
@@ -804,13 +803,6 @@ retry:
if (slot >= 0) {
atomic_inc(&rdev->nr_pending);
- if (test_bit(Faulty, &rdev->flags)) {
- /* Cannot risk returning a device that failed
- * before we inc'ed nr_pending
- */
- rdev_dec_pending(rdev, conf->mddev);
- goto retry;
- }
r10_bio->read_slot = slot;
} else
rdev = NULL;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-02 6:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-02 6:19 [md PATCH 00/18] Assorted minor fixes, particularly RCU protection NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 07/18] md/raid10: minor code improvement in fix_read_error() NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 09/18] md/raid10: stop print_conf from being too verbose NeilBrown
2016-06-02 18:47 ` John Stoffel
2016-06-02 22:48 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:39 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-10 6:47 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 12/18] md/raid1: add rcu protection to rdev in fix_read_error NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 11/18] md/raid1: small code cleanup in end_sync_write NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 04/18] md/raid10: add rcu protection in raid10_status NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 08/18] md/raid10: simplify print_conf a little NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 06/18] md/raid10: add rcu protection to rdev access during reshape NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 01/18] md: disconnect device from personality before trying to remove it NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:31 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-10 6:40 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 03/18] md/raid10: fix refounct imbalance when resyncing an array with a replacement device NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 10/18] md/raid1: small cleanup in raid1_end_read/write_request NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 14/18] md/raid5: add rcu protection to rdev accesses in want_replace NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 13/18] md/raid5: add rcu protection to rdev accesses in handle_failed_sync NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 15/18] md/raid5: add rcu protection to rdev accesses in raid5_status NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 16/18] md/multipath: add rcu protection to rdev access in multipath_status NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 05/18] md/raid10: add rcu protection to rdev access in raid10_sync_request NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:33 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-10 6:46 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-10 16:22 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 17/18] md: be extra careful not to take a reference to a Faulty device NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 18/18] md: reduce the number of synchronize_rcu() calls when multiple devices fail NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:28 ` [md PATCH 00/18] Assorted minor fixes, particularly RCU protection Shaohua Li
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=20160602061952.2939.41358.stgit@noble \
--to=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shli@kernel.org \
/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).