[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <84A937D219C2B44EB8EA44831ACA1E49166C741F@SC-MBX02-3.TheFacebook.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 05:22:25 +0000
From: Dan Williams <djbw@...com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
CC: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Tomasz Figa <t.figa@...sung.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] raid5: panic() on dma_wait_for_async_tx() error
On 11/18/12 5:06 PM, "NeilBrown" <neilb@...e.de> wrote:
>
>Hi Dan,
> could you comment on this please? Would it make sense to arrange for
>errors
> to propagate up? Or should we arrange to do a software-fallback in the
>dma
> engine is a problem? What sort of things can cause error here anyway?
Propagating up is missing reliable "dma abort" operation.
In these cases the engine failed to complete due to hardware hang / driver
bug, or has hit a memory error (uncorrectable even with software
fallback). This originally should have been using async_tx_quiesce()
which also does the panic.
The engines that I have worked with have either lacked support for
aborting, or were otherwise unable to recover from a hardware hang.
However, for engines that do support error recovery they should be able to
hide the failure from the upper layers.
--
Dan
--
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