From: "BERTRAND Joël" <joel.bertrand@systella.fr>
To: "Ross S. W. Walker" <rwalker@medallion.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
iscsitarget-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Raid1/5 over iSCSI trouble
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:06:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47191C66.309@systella.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E2BB8074E5500C42984D980D4BD78EF9017A296F@MFG-NYC-EXCH2.mfg.prv>
Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
> BERTRAND Joël wrote:
>> BERTRAND Joël wrote:
>>> Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>>> Dan Williams wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 01:04 -0700, BERTRAND Joël wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I run for 12 hours some dd's (read and write in nullio)
>>>>>> between
>>>>>> initiator and target without any disconnection. Thus
>> iSCSI code seems
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> be robust. Both initiator and target are alone on a
>> single gigabit
>>>>>> ethernet link (without any switch). I'm investigating...
>>>>>>
>>>>> Can you reproduce on 2.6.22?
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, I do not think this is the cause of your failure,
>> but you have
>>>>> CONFIG_DMA_ENGINE=y in your config. Setting this to 'n'
>> will compile
>>>>> out the unneeded checks for offload engines in async_memcpy and
>>>>> async_xor.
>>>> Given that offload engines are far less tested code, I
>> think this is a
>>>> very good thing to try!
>>> I'm trying wihtout CONFIG_DMA_ENGINE=y. istd1 only uses
>> 40% of one
>>> CPU when I rebuild my raid1 array. 1% of this array was now
>>> resynchronized without any hang.
>>>
>>> Root gershwin:[/usr/scripts] > cat /proc/mdstat
>>> Personalities : [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
>>> md7 : active raid1 sdi1[2] md_d0p1[0]
>>> 1464725632 blocks [2/1] [U_]
>>> [>....................] recovery = 1.0%
>> (15705536/1464725632)
>>> finish=1103.9min speed=21875K/sec
>> Same result...
>>
>> connection2:0: iscsi: detected conn error (1011)
>>
>> session2: iscsi: session recovery timed out after 120 secs
>> sd 4:0:0:0: scsi: Device offlined - not ready after error recovery
>> sd 4:0:0:0: scsi: Device offlined - not ready after error recovery
>> sd 4:0:0:0: scsi: Device offlined - not ready after error recovery
>> sd 4:0:0:0: scsi: Device offlined - not ready after error recovery
>> sd 4:0:0:0: scsi: Device offlined - not ready after error recovery
>> sd 4:0:0:0: scsi: Device offlined - not ready after error recovery
>> sd 4:0:0:0: scsi: Device offlined - not ready after error recovery
>
> I am unsure why you would want to setup an iSCSI RAID1, but before
> doing so I would try to verify that each independant iSCSI session
> is bullet proof.
I use one and only one iSCSI session. Raid1 array is built between a
local and iSCSI volume.
JKB
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-19 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-16 13:24 [BUG] Raid5 trouble BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-17 14:32 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-17 14:58 ` Dan Williams
2007-10-17 15:40 ` Dan Williams
2007-10-17 16:44 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-18 0:46 ` Dan Williams
2007-10-18 8:29 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-19 2:55 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-19 8:04 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-19 15:51 ` Dan Williams
2007-10-19 16:03 ` BERTRAND Joël
[not found] ` <4718DE66.8000905@tmr.com>
2007-10-19 20:42 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-19 20:49 ` [BUG] Raid1/5 over iSCSI trouble BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-19 21:02 ` [Iscsitarget-devel] " Ross S. W. Walker
2007-10-19 21:06 ` BERTRAND Joël [this message]
2007-10-19 21:10 ` Ross S. W. Walker
2007-10-20 7:45 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-19 21:11 ` [Iscsitarget-devel] " Scott Kaelin
2007-10-19 21:04 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-19 21:08 ` Ross S. W. Walker
2007-10-19 21:12 ` Dan Williams
2007-10-20 8:05 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-24 7:12 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-24 20:10 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-24 23:49 ` Dan Williams
2007-10-25 0:03 ` David Miller
2007-10-27 13:29 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-27 18:27 ` Dan Williams
2007-10-27 19:35 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-27 21:13 ` Ming Zhang
2007-10-29 10:40 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-19 21:19 ` Ming Zhang
2007-10-19 23:50 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-19 23:58 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-20 7:52 ` BERTRAND Joël
2007-10-17 16:07 ` [BUG] Raid5 trouble BERTRAND Joël
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=47191C66.309@systella.fr \
--to=joel.bertrand@systella.fr \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=iscsitarget-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rwalker@medallion.com \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.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).