On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:49 PM, NeilBrown wrote: >> >> >> I would prefer to get immediate errors if nothing can be done to satisfy the >> request and I've been thinking of something like the attached patch. The >> patch below is incomplete. It does not take into account any reshaping that >> is going on, nor does it try to figure out if a mirror set in RAID10 has died; >> but I hope it gets the basic idea across. >> >> Is this a good way to handle this situation, or am I missing something? > > I think we do get immediate errors (once all bugs are fixed). > Your patch does extra work for every request which is only of value if the > array has failed - and it really doesn't make sense to optimise for a failed > array. > The current approach is to just try to satisfy a request and once we find > that we need to do something that is impossible - return an error at that > point. I think that is best. > > Can you try the commit I identified and see if it makes the problem go away? Yes, that sounds better. I will try with the commit you mentioned. thanks, brassow -- 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
