linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guoqing Jiang <guoqing.jiang@cloud.ionos.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>, Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>,
	Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>,
	"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] md: add feature flag MD_FEATURE_RAID0_LAYOUT
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:33:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b68b130c-3155-22c4-d986-b80da9dc47f7@cloud.ionos.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87lfuyarcb.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>

Hi Neil,

On 9/9/19 8:58 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
> 
> Due to a bug introduced in Linux 3.14 we cannot determine the
> correctly layout for a multi-zone RAID0 array - there are two
> possibiities.

possibilities.

> 
> It is possible to tell the kernel which to chose using a module
> parameter, but this can be clumsy to use.  It would be best if
> the choice were recorded in the metadata.
> So add a feature flag for this purpose.
> If it is set, then the 'layout' field of the superblock is used
> to determine which layout to use.
> 
> If this flag is not set, then mddev->layout gets set to -1,
> which causes the module parameter to be required.

Could you point where the flag is set? Thanks.

> 
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> ---
>   drivers/md/md.c                | 13 +++++++++++++
>   drivers/md/raid0.c             |  2 ++
>   include/uapi/linux/raid/md_p.h |  2 ++
>   3 files changed, 17 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
> index 1f70ec595282..a41fce7f8b4c 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/md.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/md.c
> @@ -1232,6 +1232,8 @@ static int super_90_validate(struct mddev *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev)
>   			mddev->new_layout = mddev->layout;
>   			mddev->new_chunk_sectors = mddev->chunk_sectors;
>   		}
> +		if (mddev->level == 0)
> +			mddev->layout = -1;
>   
>   		if (sb->state & (1<<MD_SB_CLEAN))
>   			mddev->recovery_cp = MaxSector;
> @@ -1647,6 +1649,10 @@ static int super_1_load(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct md_rdev *refdev, int minor_
>   		rdev->ppl.sector = rdev->sb_start + rdev->ppl.offset;
>   	}
>   
> +	if ((le32_to_cpu(sb->feature_map) & MD_FEATURE_RAID0_LAYOUT) &&
> +	    sb->level != 0)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
>   	if (!refdev) {
>   		ret = 1;
>   	} else {
> @@ -1757,6 +1763,10 @@ static int super_1_validate(struct mddev *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev)
>   			mddev->new_chunk_sectors = mddev->chunk_sectors;
>   		}
>   
> +		if (mddev->level == 0 &&
> +		    !(le32_to_cpu(sb->feature_map) & MD_FEATURE_RAID0_LAYOUT))
> +			mddev->layout = -1;
> +
>   		if (le32_to_cpu(sb->feature_map) & MD_FEATURE_JOURNAL)
>   			set_bit(MD_HAS_JOURNAL, &mddev->flags);
>   
> @@ -6852,6 +6862,9 @@ static int set_array_info(struct mddev *mddev, mdu_array_info_t *info)
>   	mddev->external	     = 0;
>   
>   	mddev->layout        = info->layout;
> +	if (mddev->level == 0)
> +		/* Cannot trust RAID0 layout info here */
> +		mddev->layout = -1;
>   	mddev->chunk_sectors = info->chunk_size >> 9;
>   
>   	if (mddev->persistent) {
> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid0.c b/drivers/md/raid0.c
> index a8888c12308a..6f095b0b6f5c 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/raid0.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/raid0.c
> @@ -145,6 +145,8 @@ static int create_strip_zones(struct mddev *mddev, struct r0conf **private_conf)
>   
>   	if (conf->nr_strip_zones == 1) {
>   		conf->layout = RAID0_ORIG_LAYOUT;
> +	} else if (mddev->layout == RAID0_ORIG_LAYOUT ||
> +		   mddev->layout == RAID0_ALT_MULTIZONE_LAYOUT) {

Maybe "conf->layout = mddev->layout" here? Otherwise seems conf->layout is not set accordingly, just 
my 2 cents.

>   	} else if (default_layout == RAID0_ORIG_LAYOUT ||
>   		   default_layout == RAID0_ALT_MULTIZONE_LAYOUT) {
>   		conf->layout = default_layout;
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/raid/md_p.h b/include/uapi/linux/raid/md_p.h
> index b0d15c73f6d7..1f2d8c81f0e0 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/raid/md_p.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/raid/md_p.h
> @@ -329,6 +329,7 @@ struct mdp_superblock_1 {
>   #define	MD_FEATURE_JOURNAL		512 /* support write cache */
>   #define	MD_FEATURE_PPL			1024 /* support PPL */
>   #define	MD_FEATURE_MULTIPLE_PPLS	2048 /* support for multiple PPLs */
> +#define	MD_FEATURE_RAID0_LAYOUT		4096 /* layout is meaningful for RAID0 */
>   #define	MD_FEATURE_ALL			(MD_FEATURE_BITMAP_OFFSET	\
>   					|MD_FEATURE_RECOVERY_OFFSET	\
>   					|MD_FEATURE_RESHAPE_ACTIVE	\
> @@ -341,6 +342,7 @@ struct mdp_superblock_1 {
>   					|MD_FEATURE_JOURNAL		\
>   					|MD_FEATURE_PPL			\
>   					|MD_FEATURE_MULTIPLE_PPLS	\
> +					|MD_FEATURE_RAID0_LAYOUT	\
>   					)
>   
>   struct r5l_payload_header {
> 

Thanks,
Guoqing

  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-09 15:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-22 10:38 [RFC] How to handle an ugly md raid0 sector map bug ? Coly Li
2019-08-23  0:02 ` NeilBrown
2019-08-23 16:37   ` Song Liu
2019-08-23 17:03     ` Coly Li
2019-08-23 17:17       ` Song Liu
2019-08-23 17:47         ` Coly Li
2019-09-09  6:57           ` [PATCH] md/raid0: avoid RAID0 data corruption due to layout confusion NeilBrown
2019-09-09  6:58             ` [PATCH 2/2] md: add feature flag MD_FEATURE_RAID0_LAYOUT NeilBrown
2019-09-09 15:33               ` Guoqing Jiang [this message]
2019-09-09 23:26                 ` NeilBrown
2019-09-09 14:56             ` [PATCH] md/raid0: avoid RAID0 data corruption due to layout confusion Song Liu
2019-09-09 23:33               ` NeilBrown
2019-09-10 15:45                 ` Song Liu
2019-09-10 16:01                   ` Guoqing Jiang
2019-09-10 23:08                     ` NeilBrown
2019-09-11  9:56                       ` Song Liu
2019-09-11 22:48                         ` NeilBrown
2019-09-09 15:09             ` Guoqing Jiang
2019-09-09 23:34               ` NeilBrown

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=b68b130c-3155-22c4-d986-b80da9dc47f7@cloud.ionos.com \
    --to=guoqing.jiang@cloud.ionos.com \
    --cc=colyli@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.com \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).