From: Yuri Tikhonov <yur@emcraft.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, wd@denx.de,
dzu@denx.de, yanok@emcraft.com
Subject: Re[2]: [PATCH 07/11] md: rewrite handle_stripe_dirtying6 in asynchronous way
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:24:03 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1141743016.20090116172403@emcraft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e9c3a7c20901151421o69522f71rfe6d7d9621de47eb@mail.gmail.com>
On Friday, January 16, 2009 you wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> =
wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Yuri Tikhonov <yur@emcraft.com> wrote:
>> What's the reasoning behind changing the logic here, i.e. removing
>> must_compute and such? I'd feel more comfortable seeing copy and
>> paste where possible with cleanups separated out into their own patch.
>>
> Ok, I now see why this change was made. Please make this changelog
> more descriptive than "Rewrite handle_stripe_dirtying6 function to
> work asynchronously."
Sure, how about the following:
"
md: rewrite handle_stripe_dirtying6 in asynchronous way
Processing stripe dirtying in asynchronous way requires some changes=20
to the handle_stripe_dirtying6() algorithm.
In the synchronous implementation of the stripe dirtying we processed=20
dirtying of a degraded stripe (with partially changed strip(s) located=20
on the failed drive(s)) inside one handle_stripe_dirtying6() call:
- we computed the missed strips from the old parities, and thus got=20
the fully up-to-date stripe, then
- we did reconstruction using the new data to write.
In the asynchronous case of handle_stripe_dirtying6() we don't=20
process anything right inside this function (since we under the lock),=20
but only schedule the necessary operations with flags. Thus, if=20
handle_stripe_dirtying6() is performed on the top of a degraded array=20
we should schedule the reconstruction operation when the failed strips=20
are marked (by previously called fetch_block6()) as to be computed=20
(with the R5_Wantcompute flag), and all the other strips of the stripe=20
are UPTODATE. The schedule_reconstruction() function will set the=20
STRIPE_OP_POSTXOR flag [for new parity calculation], which is then=20
handled in raid_run_ops() after the STRIPE_OP_COMPUTE_BLK one [which=20
causes computing of the data missed].
"
Regards, Yuri
--
Yuri Tikhonov, Senior Software Engineer
Emcraft Systems, www.emcraft.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-16 14:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-08 21:57 [PATCH 07/11] md: rewrite handle_stripe_dirtying6 in asynchronous way Yuri Tikhonov
2009-01-15 21:51 ` Dan Williams
2009-01-15 22:21 ` Dan Williams
2009-01-16 1:07 ` Cheng Renquan
2009-01-16 14:46 ` Re[2]: " Yuri Tikhonov
2009-01-16 14:24 ` Yuri Tikhonov [this message]
2009-01-16 18:39 ` Dan Williams
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=1141743016.20090116172403@emcraft.com \
--to=yur@emcraft.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dzu@denx.de \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=wd@denx.de \
--cc=yanok@emcraft.com \
/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).