linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] training mpath to discern between SCSI errors

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 25 Aug 2010 14:15:13 -0500
From:	Mike Christie <michaelc@...wisc.edu>
To:	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
CC:	Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	James.Bottomley@...e.de, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
	tytso@....edu, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, jaxboe@...ionio.com,
	jack@...e.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, swhiteho@...hat.com,
	linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	konishi.ryusuke@....ntt.co.jp, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	vst@...b.net, rwheeler@...hat.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	chris.mason@...cle.com, dm-devel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] training mpath to discern between SCSI errors

On 08/25/2010 10:59 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25 2010 at  4:00am -0400,
> Kiyoshi Ueda<k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>  wrote:
>
>>> I'm not sure how to proceed here.  How much work would
>>> discerning between transport and IO errors take?  If it can't be done
>>> quickly enough the retry logic can be kept around to keep the old
>>> behavior but that already was a broken behavior, so...  :-(
>>
>> I'm not sure how long will it take.
>
> We first need to understand what direction we want to go with this.  We
> currently have 2 options.  But any other ideas are obviously welcome.
>
> 1)
> Mike Christie has a patchset that introduce more specific
> target/transport/host error codes.  Mike shared these pointers but he'd
> have to put the work in to refresh them:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=112487427230642&w=2
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=112487427306501&w=2
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=112487431524436&w=2
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=112487431524350&w=2
>
> errno.h new EXYZ
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=107715299008231&w=2
>
> add block layer blkdev.h error values
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=107961883915068&w=2
>
> add block layer blkdev.h error values (v2 convert more drivers)
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=112487427230642&w=2
>
> I think that patchset's appoach is fairly disruptive just to be able to
> train upper layers to differentiate (e.g. mpath).  But in the end maybe
> that change takes the code in a more desirable direction?

I think it is more disruptive, but is the cleaner approach in the end.

#2 looks hacky. In upper layers, we will have checks for dasd and other 
AOE and other drivers. And then #2 does not even work for filesystems 
(ext said they need this).



>
> 2)
> Another option is Hannes' approach of having DM consume req->errors and
> SCSI sense more directly.
>
--
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/