[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <44ECAFB4.8060206@emc.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:42:44 -0400
From: Ric Wheeler <ric@....com>
To: "Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe" <Mario.Holbe@...Ilmenau.DE>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 4/5] fail-injection capability for disk IO
Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote:
> Jens Axboe <axboe@...e.de> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Aug 23 2006, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>
>>>I think I would prefer a stackable driver instead of this hook.
>
>
> I second this, preferrably a device-mapper target similar to dm-error.
>
>
>>But that makes it more tricky to setup a test, since you have to change
>>from using /dev/sda (for example) to /dev/stacked-driver.
>
>
> Do you really think somebody would run such tests on otherwise normally
> used devices?
>
We certainly run this kind of tests on a routine basis - before we ship
a kernel to our installed field, we need to verify that it will handle
disk IO errors correctly.
In our case, the tests are run on a farm of machines that get pxe'ed to
a specific image, tested (usually by sticking in a disk known to be bad
enough to cause reliable errors ;-)) and then we watch to see that the
errors do not cause hangs, etc.
Having a requirement to change our standard image (sda ->
stacked-driver) would not be impossible, but would be less convenient...
ric
-
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