[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20060823102741.b927e092.akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 10:27:41 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...e.de>
Cc: Akinobu Mita <mita@...aclelinux.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
okuji@...ug.org
Subject: Re: [patch 4/5] fail-injection capability for disk IO
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 14:03:55 +0200
Jens Axboe <axboe@...e.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23 2006, Akinobu Mita wrote:
> > This patch provides fail-injection capability for disk IO.
> >
> > Boot option:
> >
> > fail_make_request=<probability>,<interval>,<times>,<space>
> >
> > <probability>
> >
> > specifies how often it should fail in percent.
> >
> > <interval>
> >
> > specifies the interval of failures.
> >
> > <times>
> >
> > specifies how many times failures may happen at most.
> >
> > <space>
> >
> > specifies the size of free space where disk IO can be issued
> > safely in bytes.
> >
> > Example:
> >
> > fail_make_request=100,10,-1,0
> >
> > generic_make_request() fails once per 10 times.
>
> Hmm dunno, seems a pretty useless feature to me.
We need it. What is the FS/VFS/VM behaviour in the presence of IO
errors? Nobody knows, because we rarely test it. Those few times where
people _do_ test it (the hard way), bad things tend to happen. reiserfs
(for example) likes to go wobble, wobble, wobble, BUG.
> Wouldn't it make a lot
> more sense to do this per-queue instead of a global entity?
Yes, I think so. /sys/block/sda/sda2/make-it-fail.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists