On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 04:44:47PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Several months ago, there was a discussion[1] about enhancing XFS to > take a more active role in recoverying damaged blocks from a redundant > storage device when the block device doesn't signal an error but the > filesystem can tell that something is wrong. > > Yes, we (XFS) would like to be able to exhaust all available storage > redundancy before we resort to rebuilding lost metadata, and we'd like > to do that without implementing our own RAID layer. > > In the end, the largest stumbling block seems to be how to attach > additional instructions to struct bio. Jens rejected the idea of adding > more pointers or more bytes to a struct bio since we'd be forcing > everyone to pay the extra memory price for a feature that in the ideal > situation will be used infrequently. I'd be interested in this discussion as well; the issue came up when adding support for hardware-based inline-crypto support. - Ted
