Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx> writes: > Those logs don't show any information useful to me which tells me how > long md waited, and I'm not able to parse any of the res: information > to gain clarity. It would be nice if someone can parse that, but I > can't. On timeout an elapsed time output would be nice to indicate > what the time limit is. I agree. It would also be nice to know whether there was in fact a read error at that time (in which case I may just replace the drives to avoid this problem) or whether it was some other communications glitch (in which case I may suspect the power supply, try a newer kernel, etc). With the information at hand, I'm not sure how to fix this, and since it often is a month or more between occurrences, trial and error is not likely to help. > I sure would like to see a timeout in ms [md?] in > the /sys for the device and a flag for the array to not kick a drive > for timeout until some number of consecutive timeouts have > occurred. That could be useful. And, as Neil said, if the SATA driver could be told to use longer timeouts, that might help. Neil, if you think that's a good idea, maybe you could put the request in with the SATA folks? > I would hope that a drive with multiple partitions would get the > partitions kicked, not the whole drive at once. So one slow sector > wouldn't take out multiple arrays. Only the partition gets kicked out. Yesterday, this saved me, since I had timeouts on two drives in RAID5, but all the arrays stayed up because the partitions didn't happen to be in the same array. Dan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
