On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 03:57:39PM -0400, Jes Sorensen wrote: > Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 02:00:47PM -0400, Jes Sorensen wrote: > >> Tomasz Majchrzak <tomasz.majchrzak@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> > I cannot see how badblocks program is related to this patch. It is a generic > >> > code for bad blocks support in IMSM metadata. It introduces 64-bit value for > >> > sector address, the same size as in kernel. All it does is syncing > >> > kernel bad > >> > block list with raid metadata. > >> > > >> > Tomek > >> > >> I was waiting for this response, but you cut me off the CC list so > >> missed it. > >> > >> In this case I'll go ahead and apply these patches to mdadm. > > > > Thomasz, > > > > So your original kernel patch to support bad block for external metadata writes > > '-blocked' to state. We agreed it's not required later and the applied kernel > > patches don't support that interface. Don't you need change of the mdadm > > patches? > > Well I'll wait until this is resolved then :) I have explained the process in detail in the other email. I haven't done any change to '-blocked' action. It is still requested by mdmon as disk is in blocked state when bad block is awaiting for confirmation. However my accepted patch stopped reporting disk as faulty if there are unacknowledged bad blocks. I have realized that disk should be shown as faulty only for unrecoverable state. Unacknowledged bad block can still be handled so this state is not adequate. My first mdadm patch set ignored this flag if all bad blocks have been successfully acknowledged. It was not fully correct as it would not work if bad block and unrecoverable error happen at the same time. I have resent the patches that don't ignore faulty state after acknowledging bad blocks. Tomek -- 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
