linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Lyakas <alex.bolshoy@gmail.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question about raid5 disk recovery logic
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 16:36:51 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGRgLy4jdP-ZhiPYMB=-4NYAC7YJsM2nX6SyJcgmMKHpp-FXhQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120701180053.504ba439@notabene.brown>

Thanks, Neil!
That clarifies.

Does this also mean, that when md_do_sync() gets to such
already-reconstructed stripe, it might reconstruct it once again,
unless the stripe stays in the stripe cache?

Thanks for helping,
Alex.


On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 11:00 AM, NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 10:08:40 +0300 Alexander Lyakas <alex.bolshoy@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everybody,
>> I am trying to understand what happens when raid5 is recovering a
>> disk, and a write comes to a stripe that has not been recovered yet.
>> Does md first reconstruct the missing chunk and then applies the
>> write, or first the write is applied as if the array is still degraded
>> (and not recovering), and only later the missing chunk is
>> reconstructed (when the md_do_sync() loop gets to this area)?
>> I am looking at the stripe handling logic (kernel 2.6.38), can anybody
>> pls point me at the path that handle_stripe5() takes in that case?
>>
>>
>
> Hi Alex,
>
>  The stripe is still degraded, so md/raid5 treats it like a write to a
>  degraded array.
>  Exactly what happens depends one which block is being written.
>  If the block being written would be stored on the recovering devices, then
>  md will perform a reconstruct-write.  It will read the other data blocks,
>  calculate the parity, and write out the parity and the changed data.
>  Similarly if the parity block is on the recovering device a
>  reconstruct-write will be needed.
>  If some other block is being written, md will do a read-modify-write to
>  calculate the new parity and then write out the parity and data.  In this
>  case the block on the recovering device will not be written.
>
>  I hope that clarifies the situation.
>
> NeilBrown

  reply	other threads:[~2012-07-01 13:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-01  7:08 Question about raid5 disk recovery logic Alexander Lyakas
2012-07-01  8:00 ` NeilBrown
2012-07-01 13:36   ` Alexander Lyakas [this message]
2012-07-01 21:44     ` NeilBrown
2012-07-02  8:32       ` Alexander Lyakas

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='CAGRgLy4jdP-ZhiPYMB=-4NYAC7YJsM2nX6SyJcgmMKHpp-FXhQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=alex.bolshoy@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    /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).