From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: NeilBrown Subject: Re: A sector-of-mismatch warning patch (was Re: Fault tolerance with badblocks) Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 14:49:51 +1000 Message-ID: <87h90hlac0.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> References: <03294ec0-2df0-8c1c-dd98-2e9e5efb6f4f@hale.ee> <590B3039.3060000@youngman.org.uk> <84184eb3-52c4-e7ad-cd5b-5021b5cf47ee@hale.ee> <590DC905.60207@youngman.org.uk> <87h90v8kt3.fsf@esperi.org.uk> <1533bba8-41cb-2c50-b28a-52786e463072@turmel.org> <87vapb6s9h.fsf@esperi.org.uk> <87inla73vz.fsf@esperi.org.uk> <5911A371.3030008@hesbynett.no> <878tm65kyx.fsf@esperi.org.uk> <5911AED4.9030007@hesbynett.no> <87bmr14u5f.fsf_-_@esperi.org.uk> <87efvpmqf6.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <87bmqsmrre.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <871sroscey.fsf@esperi.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <871sroscey.fsf@esperi.org.uk> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Nix Cc: Chris Murphy , David Brown , Anthony Youngman , Phil Turmel , "Ravi (Tom) Hale" , Linux-RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On Tue, May 16 2017, Nix wrote: > On 16 May 2017, NeilBrown spake thusly: > >> Actually, I have another caveat. I don't think we want these messages >> during initial resync, or any resync. Only during a 'check' or >> 'repair'. >> So add a check for MD_RECOVERY_REQUESTED or maybe for >> sh->sectors >= conf->mddev->recovery_cp > > I completely agree, but it's already inside MD_RECOVERY_CHECK: > > if (test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_CHECK, &conf->mddev->recovery)) { > /* don't try to repair!! */ > set_bit(STRIPE_INSYNC, &sh->state); > pr_warn_ratelimited("%s: mismatch sector in range " > "%llu-%llu\n", mdname(conf->mddev), > (unsigned long long) sh->sector, > (unsigned long long) sh->sector + > STRIPE_SECTORS); > } else { > > Doesn't that already mean that someone has explicitly triggered a check > action? Uhmm... yeah. I lose track of which flags me what exactly. You log messages aren't generated when 'repair' is used, only when 'check' is. I can see why you might have chosen that, but I wonder if it is best. But I'm OK with this patch as it stands. NeilBrown --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEG8Yp69OQ2HB7X0l6Oeye3VZigbkFAlkeeW8ACgkQOeye3VZi gblqbw//WjgpF5pF0o5lIRC7WvekhnEPIFQVg0FS3ZCCQjuG4Bp8/TapqVcZWNeJ 8SVOZ5pe4GlWWLBLvynR2xirzrfVSswRCclMxtoRdTm4PlIbEdzTh9MDcNaEQljn U7CxnUVtrW7//Z1IH+eZc5yfACIkjLiVjAQsDtbUDLlM4yI4Mez8COeFHN4Kd9uo W0Rs3PKrHo/KOhzR6oWZk4pvcdkKUKKEg3ySAc8VYVmycmE99KQf1fKFGlbAVKrp hd2azS/Pd9SSYsCBFmKe8RmZI2I5ViiEI/BLT2hCtdUPv5z/r1sPT/AKLfJT7fLQ lxTkhtWvXeqJj7JpgT5gZxdF1YZfytBkuwf8JoDGd3xNXwJa1sOXGvzFq1wdbDlb sfLdFT8UQODfCdjr0KOCMxgU5SjU/TDYIKJgPV9mK/cHFYuqKqo1Rb8xuJkGVuAU u6afjrwwdGQ88f5Th650JJxhXNckDkaZE1zHwxczvNJyMTvq3WBsZv2Rpug7AsBY 53e8nJiKiWm1Sn/1efBVc1hIOb+/ydx55OWtYJdZfpd9jgvp1NwcS73ARl8TgtTj Yxo3UY0HVwj1EpMrPBqmMZjrGvxhGUArDbHOTma67vagE0ShBJY3Wx42ryPmnfO8 okx/LCk3cB07F8dGHOXCpuIvIMDtDflettNfBaF3Czwac5nQRFI= =zYhS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--