1. 12 4月, 2012 1 次提交
  2. 03 4月, 2012 2 次提交
  3. 02 4月, 2012 1 次提交
  4. 19 3月, 2012 3 次提交
    • N
      md/raid1: handle merge_bvec_fn in member devices. · 6b740b8d
      NeilBrown 提交于
      Currently we don't honour merge_bvec_fn in member devices so if there
      is one, we force all requests to be single-page at most.
      This is not ideal.
      
      So create a raid1 merge_bvec_fn to check that function in children
      as well.
      
      This introduces a small problem.  There is no locking around calls
      the ->merge_bvec_fn and subsequent calls to ->make_request.  So a
      device added between these could end up getting a request which
      violates its merge_bvec_fn.
      
      Currently the best we can do is synchronize_sched().  This will work
      providing no preemption happens.  If there is is preemption, we just
      have to hope that new devices are largely consistent with old devices.
      Signed-off-by: NNeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
      6b740b8d
    • N
      md: tidy up rdev_for_each usage. · dafb20fa
      NeilBrown 提交于
      md.h has an 'rdev_for_each()' macro for iterating the rdevs in an
      mddev.  However it uses the 'safe' version of list_for_each_entry,
      and so requires the extra variable, but doesn't include 'safe' in the
      name, which is useful documentation.
      
      Consequently some places use this safe version without needing it, and
      many use an explicity list_for_each entry.
      
      So:
       - rename rdev_for_each to rdev_for_each_safe
       - create a new rdev_for_each which uses the plain
         list_for_each_entry,
       - use the 'safe' version only where needed, and convert all other
         list_for_each_entry calls to use rdev_for_each.
      Signed-off-by: NNeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
      dafb20fa
    • N
      md/raid1,raid10: avoid deadlock during resync/recovery. · d6b42dcb
      NeilBrown 提交于
      If RAID1 or RAID10 is used under LVM or some other stacking
      block device, it is possible to enter a deadlock during
      resync or recovery.
      This can happen if the upper level block device creates
      two requests to the RAID1 or RAID10.  The first request gets
      processed, blocks recovery and queue requests for underlying
      requests in current->bio_list.  A resync request then starts
      which will wait for those requests and block new IO.
      
      But then the second request to the RAID1/10 will be attempted
      and it cannot progress until the resync request completes,
      which cannot progress until the underlying device requests complete,
      which are on a queue behind that second request.
      
      So allow that second request to proceed even though there is
      a resync request about to start.
      
      This is suitable for any -stable kernel.
      
      Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
      Reported-by: NRay Morris <support@bettercgi.com>
      Tested-by: NRay Morris <support@bettercgi.com>
      Signed-off-by: NNeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
      d6b42dcb
  5. 13 2月, 2012 1 次提交
  6. 11 1月, 2012 1 次提交
  7. 23 12月, 2011 8 次提交
  8. 01 11月, 2011 1 次提交
  9. 26 10月, 2011 1 次提交
    • N
      md: Fix some bugs in recovery_disabled handling. · d890fa2b
      NeilBrown 提交于
      In 3.0 we changed the way recovery_disabled was handle so that instead
      of testing against zero, we test an mddev-> value against a conf->
      value.
      Two problems:
        1/ one place in raid1 was missed and still sets to '1'.
        2/ We didn't explicitly set the conf-> value at array creation
           time.
           It defaulted to '0' just like the mddev value does so they
           could appear equal and thus disable recovery.
           This did not affect normal 'md' as it calls bind_rdev_to_array
           which changes the mddev value.  However the dmraid interface
           doesn't call this and so doesn't change ->recovery_disabled; so at
           array start all recovery is incorrectly disabled.
      
      So initialise the 'conf' value to one less that the mddev value, so
      the will only be the same when explicitly set that way.
      Reported-by: NJonathan Brassow <jbrassow@redhat.com>
      Signed-off-by: NNeilBrown  <neilb@suse.de>
      d890fa2b
  10. 24 10月, 2011 1 次提交
    • T
      block: Remove the control of complete cpu from bio. · 9562ad9a
      Tao Ma 提交于
      bio originally has the functionality to set the complete cpu, but
      it is broken.
      
      Chirstoph said that "This code is unused, and from the all the
      discussions lately pretty obviously broken.  The only thing keeping
      it serves is creating more confusion and possibly more bugs."
      
      And Jens replied with "We can kill bio_set_completion_cpu(). I'm fine
      with leaving cpu control to the request based drivers, they are the
      only ones that can toggle the setting anyway".
      
      So this patch tries to remove all the work of controling complete cpu
      from a bio.
      
      Cc: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
      Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
      Signed-off-by: NTao Ma <boyu.mt@taobao.com>
      Signed-off-by: NJens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
      9562ad9a
  11. 11 10月, 2011 7 次提交
  12. 07 10月, 2011 3 次提交
  13. 21 9月, 2011 1 次提交
    • N
      md: Avoid waking up a thread after it has been freed. · 01f96c0a
      NeilBrown 提交于
      Two related problems:
      
      1/ some error paths call "md_unregister_thread(mddev->thread)"
         without subsequently clearing ->thread.  A subsequent call
         to mddev_unlock will try to wake the thread, and crash.
      
      2/ Most calls to md_wakeup_thread are protected against the thread
         disappeared either by:
            - holding the ->mutex
            - having an active request, so something else must be keeping
              the array active.
         However mddev_unlock calls md_wakeup_thread after dropping the
         mutex and without any certainty of an active request, so the
         ->thread could theoretically disappear.
         So we need a spinlock to provide some protections.
      
      So change md_unregister_thread to take a pointer to the thread
      pointer, and ensure that it always does the required locking, and
      clears the pointer properly.
      Reported-by: N"Moshe Melnikov" <moshe@zadarastorage.com>
      Signed-off-by: NNeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
      cc: stable@kernel.org
      01f96c0a
  14. 12 9月, 2011 1 次提交
  15. 10 9月, 2011 1 次提交
  16. 28 7月, 2011 7 次提交