On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:28:45 +0200 Asdo <asdo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 04/20/11 00:51, NeilBrown wrote: > > If there was such a deadlock, it would be a serious bug. I don't believe > > such a bug exists (but hey - I keep finding bugs in this code, when I'm not > > busy writing new bugs, so I guess it could crash you machine and kill your > > cat). > > > > I am aware that raids 0,1,10 do not copy the buffer so I don't think > there is risk of deadlock... > > Raids 456 do copy the buffer... but the destination buffers are > preallocated, right? Correct - destination buffers - when used - are preallocated. If this were not the case you would get deadlocks in normal usage without having to wait for suspend/resume to trigger them. NeilBrown -- 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
