[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F6006C3.4010204@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:47:31 +0800
From: Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/7] Add TRIM support for raid linear/0/1/10
On 3/14/12 10:24 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:04:12 +0800 Shaohua Li <shli@...ionio.com> wrote:
>
> > The patches add TRIM support for raid linear/0/1/10. I'll add TRIM
support for
> > raid 4/5/6 later. The implementation is pretty straightforward and
> > self-explained.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shaohua
>
> Thanks.
> They look mostly OK.
>
> In raid0.c, I think you'll need to change
>
> /* Sanity check -- queue functions should prevent this happening */
> if (bio->bi_vcnt != 1 ||
> bio->bi_idx != 0)
> goto bad_map;
>
> to also allow for 'bi_vcnt == 0' like you did in bio_split.
>
> Also I wonder about handling failure in RAID1.
> I think the code will currently treat it like a write error, and
> maybe record a bad block (then fail the device is writing the badblock
> record fails). Is that what were want?
Mainly to simplify the code. And I thought a normal discard should not fail.
If it fails, something is wrong, marked it as badblock maybe not bad.
> And of course resync/recovery will mess up the discarded sector
information,
> so this isn't a complete solution for RAID1. But it is a reasonable start.
Yes, this is a mess. Looks impossible without ondisk format change at
first glance.
Thanks,
Shaohua
--
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