[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D0B31B5.101@suse.de>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 10:47:33 +0100
From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
To: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
Cc: Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura@...jp.nec.com>,
Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>, michaelc@...wisc.edu,
tytso@....edu, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, jaxboe@...ionio.com,
vst@...b.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
James.Bottomley@...e.de, Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...sta.com>,
konishi.ryusuke@....ntt.co.jp, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
jack@...e.cz, rwheeler@...hat.com, swhiteho@...hat.com,
chris.mason@...cle.com, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: training mpath to discern between SCSI errors
On 11/30/2010 11:59 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18 2010 at 10:11pm -0500,
> Malahal Naineni <malahal@...ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Hannes Reinecke [hare@...e.de] wrote:
>>>> Also (although this might be a bit off topic from your patch),
>>>> can we expand such a distinction to what should be logged?
>>>> Currently, it's difficult to distinguish important SCSI/block errors
>>>> and less important ones in kernel log.
>>>> For example, when I get a link failure on sda, kernel prints something
>>>> like below, regardless of whether the I/O is recovered by multipathing or not:
>>>> end_request: I/O error, dev sda, sector XXXXX
>>>>
>>> Indeed, when using the above we could be modifying the above
>>> message, eg by
>>>
>>> end_request: transport error, dev sda, sector XXXXX
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> end_request: target error, dev sda, sector XXXXX
>>>
>>> which would improve the output noticeable.
>>>
>>>> Setting REQ_QUIET in dm-multipath could mask the message
>>>> but also other important ones in SCSI.
>>>>
>>> Hmm. Not sure about that, but I think the above modifications will
>>> be useful already.
>>>
>>> I'll be sending an updated patch.
>>
>> Hannes, is there an updated version of this patch? It applied fine with
>> Linus git tree with a minor reject! I would like to test an updated
>> version if you have one (the update seems to refer to better logging
>> only, right?).
>
> Hannes,
>
> Any chance you've had time to fold your proposed logging changes in and
> rebase this patch? Could you post that updated patch?
>
yes, will be following shortly.
> I'd like to help see this patch through to inclussion when 2.6.38 merge
> window opens. I can help with further review, testing and development.
>
Ok, thanks.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage
hare@...e.de +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
--
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