Re: [PATCH] BTRFS: Runs the xor function if a Block has failed

2016-01-05 Thread David Sterba
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 09:15:44PM -0500, Sanidhya Solanki wrote: > On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 18:18:26 +0100 > David Sterba wrote: > > > That's just the comment copied, the changelog does not explain why > > it's ok to do just the run_xor there. It does not seem trivial to me. > >

Re: [PATCH] BTRFS: Runs the xor function if a Block has failed

2016-01-05 Thread Sanidhya Solanki
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 10:22:36 +0100 David Sterba wrote: > If the data a rerecovered, why is -EIO still returned? In the other places in the file where the code appears, the submitted patch is all that is required to do the xor. I think we also need to include the following line:

Re: [PATCH] BTRFS: Runs the xor function if a Block has failed

2015-12-30 Thread David Sterba
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 01:28:36AM -0500, Sanidhya Solanki wrote: > The patch adds the xor function after the P stripe > has failed, without bad data or the Q stripe. That's just the comment copied, the changelog does not explain why it's ok to do just the run_xor there. It does not seem trivial

Re: [PATCH] BTRFS: Runs the xor function if a Block has failed

2015-12-30 Thread Sanidhya Solanki
On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 18:18:26 +0100 David Sterba wrote: > That's just the comment copied, the changelog does not explain why > it's ok to do just the run_xor there. It does not seem trivial to me. > Please describe that the end result after the code change is expected. In the

[PATCH] BTRFS: Runs the xor function if a Block has failed

2015-12-30 Thread Sanidhya Solanki
The patch adds the xor function after the P stripe has failed, without bad data or the Q stripe. Signed-off-by: Sanidhya Solanki --- fs/btrfs/raid56.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/raid56.c b/fs/btrfs/raid56.c index