Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday February 7, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NeilBrown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ retry:
sh = get_active_stripe(conf, new_sector, pd_idx,
(bi-bi_rwRWA_MASK));
if (sh) {
-
-while (!add_stripe_bio(sh, bi, dd_idx,
(bi-bi_rwRW_MASK))) {
-/* add failed due to overlap. Flush
everything
+if (!add_stripe_bio(sh, bi, dd_idx,
(bi-bi_rwRW_MASK))) {
+/* Add failed due to overlap. Flush
everything
* and wait a while
- * FIXME - overlapping requests should
be handled better
*/
raid5_unplug_device(mddev-queue);
-set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
-schedule_timeout(1);
+release_stripe(sh);
+schedule();
+goto retry;
Worrisome. If the calling process has SCHED_RR or SCHED_FIFO policy, this
could cause a lockup, perhaps.
Is that just that I should have the prepare_to_wait after the retry:
label rather than before, or is there something more subtle.
umm, yes. We always exit from schedule() in state TASK_RUNNING, so we need
to run prepare_to_wait() each time around. See __wait_on_bit() for a
canonical example.
### Diffstat output
./drivers/md/raid5.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff ./drivers/md/raid5.c~current~ ./drivers/md/raid5.c
--- ./drivers/md/raid5.c~current~ 2005-02-07 13:34:23.0 +1100
+++ ./drivers/md/raid5.c 2005-02-08 13:34:38.0 +1100
@@ -1433,9 +1433,9 @@ static int make_request (request_queue_t
(unsigned long long)new_sector,
(unsigned long long)logical_sector);
+ retry:
prepare_to_wait(conf-wait_for_overlap, w,
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
- retry:
sh = get_active_stripe(conf, new_sector, pd_idx,
(bi-bi_rwRWA_MASK));
if (sh) {
if (!add_stripe_bio(sh, bi, dd_idx,
(bi-bi_rwRW_MASK))) {
You missed one.
--- 25/drivers/md/raid5.c~md-fix-handling-of-overlapping-requests-in-raid5-fix
2005-02-07 19:04:18.0 -0800
+++ 25-akpm/drivers/md/raid5.c 2005-02-07 19:04:48.0 -0800
@@ -1433,9 +1433,8 @@ static int make_request (request_queue_t
(unsigned long long)new_sector,
(unsigned long long)logical_sector);
- prepare_to_wait(conf-wait_for_overlap, w,
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
-
retry:
+ prepare_to_wait(conf-wait_for_overlap, w,
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
sh = get_active_stripe(conf, new_sector, pd_idx,
(bi-bi_rwRWA_MASK));
if (sh) {
if (!add_stripe_bio(sh, bi, dd_idx,
(bi-bi_rwRW_MASK))) {
diff -puN
drivers/md/raid6main.c~md-fix-handling-of-overlapping-requests-in-raid5-fix
drivers/md/raid6main.c
---
25/drivers/md/raid6main.c~md-fix-handling-of-overlapping-requests-in-raid5-fix
2005-02-07 19:04:18.0 -0800
+++ 25-akpm/drivers/md/raid6main.c 2005-02-07 19:04:54.0 -0800
@@ -1593,9 +1593,8 @@ static int make_request (request_queue_t
(unsigned long long)new_sector,
(unsigned long long)logical_sector);
- prepare_to_wait(conf-wait_for_overlap, w,
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
-
retry:
+ prepare_to_wait(conf-wait_for_overlap, w,
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
sh = get_active_stripe(conf, new_sector, pd_idx,
(bi-bi_rwRWA_MASK));
if (sh) {
if (!add_stripe_bio(sh, bi, dd_idx,
(bi-bi_rwRW_MASK))) {
_
(That piece of the code looks pretty fugly in an 80-col xterm btw..)
-
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
