[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <465DAC72.1010201@cfl.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 12:55:14 -0400
From: Phillip Susi <psusi@....rr.com>
To: Stefan Bader <Stefan.Bader@...ibm.com>
CC: Stefan Bader <sbader3@...glemail.com>,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>,
Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices,
filesystems, and dm/md.
Stefan Bader wrote:
> You got a linear target that consists of two disks. One drive (a)
> supports barriers and the other one (b) doesn't. Device-mapper just
> maps the requests to the appropriate disk. Now the following sequence
> happens:
>
> 1. block x gets mapped to drive b
> 2. block y (with barrier) gets mapped to drive a
>
> Since drive a supports barrier request we don't get -EOPNOTSUPP but
> the request with block y might get written before block x since the
> disk are independent. I guess the chances of this are quite low since
> at some point a barrier request will also hit drive b but for the time
> being it might be better to indicate -EOPNOTSUPP right from
> device-mapper.
The device mapper needs to ensure that ALL underlying devices get a
barrier request when one comes down from above, even if it has to
construct zero length barriers to send to most of them.
-
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