From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lars Marowsky-Bree Subject: Re: raid1 critical sections not protected in 2.4.x? Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:14:46 +0200 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20031010081445.GC29059@marowsky-bree.de> References: <1065721318.4761.138.camel@persist.az.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1065721318.4761.138.camel@persist.az.mvista.com> To: Steven Dake , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 2003-10-09T10:41:59, Steven Dake said: > I have been looking at the raid1.c code. There is a kernel thread > raid1d that could be scheduled on processor A. Then on processor B, > other raid code could be scheduled as per each block I/O request. Did you follow the recent locking fixes to md I discussed with Neil? I think this fixes some of these; at least we have a confirmation from IB= M that some raid1 races (not resyncing after a hotadd, no progress during resync etc) went away with it. Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Br=E9e --=20 High Availability & Clustering ever tried. ever failed. no matter. SuSE Labs try again. fail again. fail better. Research & Development, SUSE LINUX AG -- Samuel Beckett - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html