It would certainly be easier for me if it were 2.4.26. The other 2 patches I have to apply have only been released for 2.4.26 and 2.4.25-pre9 or something like that. If it is better for everyone else to do 2.4.29, I can just backport it to my kernel. Thanks --David Dougall
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, Mark Bellon wrote: > Gordon Henderson wrote: > > >On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, Mark Bellon wrote: > > > > > > > >>I've seen this too. The worst case can actually last for over 2 minutes. > >> > >>We've been running with a patch to the RAID 1 driver that handles this > >>so critical applications do not hang for too long. Basically it uses > >>timers in the RAID 1 driver to force the disk to be treated as actually > >>having failed if it doesn't respond within a reasonable time (tunable > >>but usually ~3 seconds). It then handles the I/O requests coming back > >>async. and does the clean up. > >> > >> > > > >This is intersting, but make it an option (kernel compile, sysctl, > >etc.)... I have a small home server/firewall that I run with the disks > >spun down (noflushd) and spinning up a disk sometimes takes 8 seconds - > >it's a RAID-1 set and seems to cope OK with the disks spinning down & up > >again as required... > > > > > The current patch has config options to adjust the > Non-Responsive-Disk-Timer. A zero specified no timeout and a non-zero > value is the timeout in seconds. > > Let me pull a 2.4.26 kernel source and see how fast I can work up a > patch. Or would it better to generate it against 2.4.29? > > mark > > >Gordon > > > > > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in > the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
