linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] md/raid1,raid10: Don't set MD

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]

Message-ID: <6ce45082-2913-4ca2-b382-5beff6a799c6@yukuai.org.cn>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2025 09:36:48 +0800
From: Yu Kuai <hailan@...uai.org.cn>
To: Kenta Akagi <k@...l.me>, yukuai1@...weicloud.com, song@...nel.org,
 mtkaczyk@...nel.org, shli@...com, jgq516@...il.com
Cc: linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 yukuai3@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] md/raid1,raid10: Don't set MD_BROKEN on failfast
 bio failure

Hi,

在 2025/9/18 23:22, Kenta Akagi 写道:
>>> @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ static void raid1_end_write_request(struct bio *bio)
>>>                (bio->bi_opf & MD_FAILFAST) &&
>>>                /* We never try FailFast to WriteMostly devices */
>>>                !test_bit(WriteMostly, &rdev->flags)) {
>>> -            md_error(r1_bio->mddev, rdev);
>>> +            md_bio_failure_error(r1_bio->mddev, rdev, bio);
>>>            }
>> Can following check of faulty replaced with return value?
> In the case where raid1_end_write_request is called for a non-failfast IO,
> and the rdev has already been marked Faulty by another bio, it must not retry too.
> I think it would be simpler not to use a return value here.

You can just add Faulty check inside md_bio_failure_error() as well, and both
failfast and writemostly check.

Thanks,
Kuai