All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
To: xni@redhat.com, paul.e.luse@linux.intel.com, song@kernel.org,
	neilb@suse.com, shli@fb.com
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	yukuai3@huawei.com, yukuai1@huaweicloud.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com,
	yangerkun@huawei.com
Subject: [PATCH md-6.9 v4 06/11] md/raid1-10: factor out a new helper raid1_should_read_first()
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 17:57:09 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240229095714.926789-7-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240229095714.926789-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>

From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>

If resync is in progress, read_balance() should find the first usable
disk, otherwise, data could be inconsistent after resync is done. raid1
and raid10 implement the same checking, hence factor out the checking
to make code cleaner.

Noted that raid1 is using 'mddev->recovery_cp', which is updated after
all resync IO is done, while raid10 is using 'conf->next_resync', which
is inaccurate because raid10 update it before submitting resync IO.
Fortunately, raid10 read IO can't concurrent with resync IO, hence there
is no problem. And this patch also switch raid10 to use
'mddev->recovery_cp'.

Co-developed-by: Paul Luse <paul.e.luse@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul Luse <paul.e.luse@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Xiao Ni <xni@redhat.com>
---
 drivers/md/raid1-10.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/md/raid1.c    | 15 ++-------------
 drivers/md/raid10.c   | 13 ++-----------
 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1-10.c b/drivers/md/raid1-10.c
index 9bc0f0022a6c..2ea1710a3b70 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid1-10.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid1-10.c
@@ -276,3 +276,23 @@ static inline int raid1_check_read_range(struct md_rdev *rdev,
 	*len = first_bad + bad_sectors - this_sector;
 	return 0;
 }
+
+/*
+ * Check if read should choose the first rdev.
+ *
+ * Balance on the whole device if no resync is going on (recovery is ok) or
+ * below the resync window. Otherwise, take the first readable disk.
+ */
+static inline bool raid1_should_read_first(struct mddev *mddev,
+					   sector_t this_sector, int len)
+{
+	if ((mddev->recovery_cp < this_sector + len))
+		return true;
+
+	if (mddev_is_clustered(mddev) &&
+	    md_cluster_ops->area_resyncing(mddev, READ, this_sector,
+					   this_sector + len))
+		return true;
+
+	return false;
+}
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1.c b/drivers/md/raid1.c
index fa86d9fdb16f..30f467bb48fd 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid1.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid1.c
@@ -605,11 +605,6 @@ static int read_balance(struct r1conf *conf, struct r1bio *r1_bio, int *max_sect
 	struct md_rdev *rdev;
 	int choose_first;
 
-	/*
-	 * Check if we can balance. We can balance on the whole
-	 * device if no resync is going on, or below the resync window.
-	 * We take the first readable disk when above the resync window.
-	 */
  retry:
 	sectors = r1_bio->sectors;
 	best_disk = -1;
@@ -619,16 +614,10 @@ static int read_balance(struct r1conf *conf, struct r1bio *r1_bio, int *max_sect
 	best_pending_disk = -1;
 	min_pending = UINT_MAX;
 	best_good_sectors = 0;
+	choose_first = raid1_should_read_first(conf->mddev, this_sector,
+					       sectors);
 	clear_bit(R1BIO_FailFast, &r1_bio->state);
 
-	if ((conf->mddev->recovery_cp < this_sector + sectors) ||
-	    (mddev_is_clustered(conf->mddev) &&
-	    md_cluster_ops->area_resyncing(conf->mddev, READ, this_sector,
-		    this_sector + sectors)))
-		choose_first = 1;
-	else
-		choose_first = 0;
-
 	for (disk = 0 ; disk < conf->raid_disks * 2 ; disk++) {
 		sector_t dist;
 		sector_t first_bad;
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid10.c b/drivers/md/raid10.c
index d5a7a621f0f0..8aecdb1ccc16 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid10.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c
@@ -748,17 +748,8 @@ static struct md_rdev *read_balance(struct r10conf *conf,
 	best_good_sectors = 0;
 	do_balance = 1;
 	clear_bit(R10BIO_FailFast, &r10_bio->state);
-	/*
-	 * Check if we can balance. We can balance on the whole
-	 * device if no resync is going on (recovery is ok), or below
-	 * the resync window. We take the first readable disk when
-	 * above the resync window.
-	 */
-	if ((conf->mddev->recovery_cp < MaxSector
-	     && (this_sector + sectors >= conf->next_resync)) ||
-	    (mddev_is_clustered(conf->mddev) &&
-	     md_cluster_ops->area_resyncing(conf->mddev, READ, this_sector,
-					    this_sector + sectors)))
+
+	if (raid1_should_read_first(conf->mddev, this_sector, sectors))
 		do_balance = 0;
 
 	for (slot = 0; slot < conf->copies ; slot++) {
-- 
2.39.2


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-02-29 10:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-29  9:57 [PATCH md-6.9 v4 00/11] md/raid1: refactor read_balance() and some minor fix Yu Kuai
2024-02-29  9:57 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 01/11] md: add a new helper rdev_has_badblock() Yu Kuai
2024-02-29  9:57 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 02/11] md/raid1: factor out helpers to add rdev to conf Yu Kuai
2024-02-29  9:57 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 03/11] md/raid1: record nonrot rdevs while adding/removing rdevs " Yu Kuai
2024-02-29 16:37   ` Paul Menzel
2024-03-01  1:59     ` Yu Kuai
2024-02-29  9:57 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 04/11] md/raid1: fix choose next idle in read_balance() Yu Kuai
2024-02-29  9:57 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 05/11] md/raid1-10: add a helper raid1_check_read_range() Yu Kuai
2024-02-29  9:57 ` Yu Kuai [this message]
2024-02-29  9:57 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 07/11] md/raid1: factor out read_first_rdev() from read_balance() Yu Kuai
2024-02-29  9:57 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 08/11] md/raid1: factor out choose_slow_rdev() " Yu Kuai
2024-02-29  9:57 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 09/11] md/raid1: factor out choose_bb_rdev() " Yu Kuai
2024-02-29  9:57 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 10/11] md/raid1: factor out the code to manage sequential IO Yu Kuai
2024-02-29  9:57 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 11/11] md/raid1: factor out helpers to choose the best rdev from read_balance() Yu Kuai
2024-03-01  7:16 ` [PATCH md-6.9 v4 00/11] md/raid1: refactor read_balance() and some minor fix Song Liu

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=20240229095714.926789-7-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com \
    --to=yukuai1@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.com \
    --cc=paul.e.luse@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=shli@fb.com \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=xni@redhat.com \
    --cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=yukuai3@huawei.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.