From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin K. Petersen" Subject: Re: RAID-10 keeps aborting Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 10:34:00 -0400 Message-ID: References: <51AC1440.7020505@zytor.com> <51ACBAA0.40604@zytor.com> <51ACD511.4030604@zytor.com> <51AE2A8C.4080508@zytor.com> <51AE3441.3000208@zytor.com> <51AEA4FE.3060900@zytor.com> <20130606142747.1fc17b7f@jlaw-desktop.mno.stratus.com> <20130610101505.33b32d07@jlaw-desktop.mno.stratus.com> <20130612131543.1c79e077@notabene.brown> <51B7F41F.9000605@zytor.com> <51B885B8.9040600@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51B885B8.9040600@zytor.com> (H. Peter Anvin's message of "Wed, 12 Jun 2013 07:29:12 -0700") Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" , NeilBrown , Joe Lawrence , Dan Williams , linux-raid List-Id: linux-raid.ids >>>>> "hpa" == H Peter Anvin writes: hpa> The second question is if we should disable WRITE SAME for raid1/10 hpa> (what about raid0?) for 3.10/stable or if your patch really is hpa> sufficient... "just adds another heuristic" makes me nervous. I think we should disable 1+10 in stable until we get the recovery scenario sorted out. I don't believe there are any problems with raid0. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering