From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out30-113.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-113.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE81137B41E; Fri, 7 Aug 2026 09:05:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.113 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786093528; cv=none; b=Z114b95t8f9/9ixXWqZEGpasYE6gLKitdbLDVJoCvIMAl8nMQHU9IaKiS6UOQxL1nYk/QthYgEAuuS5gqttLTwfbfYWeHbh/fAtBe2fc3uV/XsxiAOdwhXJvQ5DFtLH6RUcLBfbCOeRn3PG3LJfWyoRyJCfgT+DUy8S5xcdvNOI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786093528; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SysRwysjioaUBGh2tbo/9oB7KnroLL+PXYIJWCtRgLY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=biwzbcq1Fxy9+BQK4yqJrLWMpYaPEKwo0ZSUrFjXOEEoXqn7SCdhTWNrmjUHOd+pgAldIvrvnTOK5a9PQ7f0e3v3PmDXDkynuJbgyoR1ixKYRKGmRt5C1XQm0khpZ8W/8wKBRMCNxY9gYKER4LeGXWh+MIS0BM+cIrffjtIpm08= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=I+ljOwe8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.113 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="I+ljOwe8" DKIM-Signature:v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1786093520; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-Id:MIME-Version; bh=rTtUvz8lNmfZbd4EKCYqEPHh9f6vtBo2v1yGvHhJwWs=; b=I+ljOwe8E1LCkszrGfwB95O46hWGra2hWqV/C1rylMuBYAfS47nsH8dOt8ouU8S544lvaSe0hCreadNXbw7zRmARW9AqWBmjj0JggFl2SahAxn1pqSDSP2tCWHjleLU/7zlPYUr8D9rRW+nu/uophAwLPdn0zL6jbS59uBtmJ7s= X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R561e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=maildocker-contentspam033045098064;MF=yunye.zhao@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=9;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0X8WIKlz_1786093519; Received: from j66c13357.sqa.eu95.tbsite.net(mailfrom:yunye.zhao@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0X8WIKlz_1786093519 cluster:ay36) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Fri, 07 Aug 2026 17:05:20 +0800 From: Yunye Zhao To: yukuai@fygo.io Cc: joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, magiclinan@didiglobal.com, sashiko-bot@kernel.org, song@kernel.org, xiao@kernel.org, yunye.zhao@linux.alibaba.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] md/raid10: skip clean regions in bulk during recovery Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 17:05:19 +0800 Message-Id: <20260807090519.122115-1-yunye.zhao@linux.alibaba.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.19.1.6.gb485710b In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Kuai, On 2026/8/7, Yu Kuai wrote: >> If I read you right, you would prefer this fixed on the bitmap side >> rather than in raid10.c. > > I still don't get why Sorry, I misread your earlier reply. I had read it as "the whole thing belongs in md-bitmap.c", i.e. that bitmap_start_sync() should hand back a device-space span, which is why I said md-bitmap.c would need the raid10 geometry. That is not what you were saying. I think the split is this: the first half belongs in md, in array address space - bitmap_start_sync() should report a much larger clean span, ideally up to the full array size - and the second half, the array -> member conversion and the minimum over the members, is what 3/3 already does. > Check the code, currently raid10 do not map the max_sync, which is RESYNC_PAGES, back > to rdev sector, and use it directly. I wonder is this safe for raid10 with chunksize less > than RESYNC_PAGES? Good point, v2 does not address that. Let me think it through properly and handle it in the next version. Thanks, Yunye