On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 08:30:08PM -0700, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> Refactor raid10_make_request into seperate read and write functions to
> clean up the code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Robert LeBlanc <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
Hi,
could you please resend the patches against my for-next branch? The two patches
don't apply.
> int bad_sectors;
> int is_bad;
>
> - is_bad = is_badblock(rdev, dev_sector,
> - max_sectors,
> + is_bad = is_badblock(rdev, dev_sector, max_sectors,
> &first_bad, &bad_sectors);
> if (is_bad < 0) {
> /* Mustn't write here until the bad block
> @@ -1353,8 +1291,7 @@ retry_write:
> r10_bio->devs[i].bio = mbio;
>
> mbio->bi_iter.bi_sector = (r10_bio->devs[i].addr+
> - choose_data_offset(r10_bio,
> - rdev));
> + choose_data_offset(r10_bio, rdev));
> mbio->bi_bdev = rdev->bdev;
> mbio->bi_end_io = raid10_end_write_request;
> bio_set_op_attrs(mbio, op, do_sync | do_fua);
> @@ -1395,8 +1332,7 @@ retry_write:
> r10_bio->devs[i].repl_bio = mbio;
>
> mbio->bi_iter.bi_sector = (r10_bio->devs[i].addr +
> - choose_data_offset(
> - r10_bio, rdev));
> + choose_data_offset(r10_bio, rdev));
> mbio->bi_bdev = rdev->bdev;
> mbio->bi_end_io = raid10_end_write_request;
> bio_set_op_attrs(mbio, op, do_sync | do_fua);
> @@ -1434,6 +1370,77 @@ retry_write:
> one_write_done(r10_bio);
> }
>
> +static void __make_request(struct mddev *mddev, struct bio *bio)
> +{
> + struct r10conf *conf = mddev->private;
> + struct r10bio *r10_bio;
> + int sectors;
> +
we do wait_barrier before md_write_start now. I'm not confortable with this.
Could you please add md_write_start here? A single line of code for write here
doesn't matter.
> + /*
> + * Register the new request and wait if the reconstruction
> + * thread has put up a bar for new requests.
> + * Continue immediately if no resync is active currently.
> + */
> + wait_barrier(conf);
> +
> + sectors = bio_sectors(bio);
> + while (test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_RESHAPE, &mddev->recovery) &&
> + bio->bi_iter.bi_sector < conf->reshape_progress &&
> + bio->bi_iter.bi_sector + sectors > conf->reshape_progress) {
> + /* IO spans the reshape position. Need to wait for
> + * reshape to pass
> + */
> + allow_barrier(conf);
> + wait_event(conf->wait_barrier,
> + conf->reshape_progress <= bio->bi_iter.bi_sector ||
> + conf->reshape_progress >= bio->bi_iter.bi_sector +
> + sectors);
> + wait_barrier(conf);
> + }
> + if (test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_RESHAPE, &mddev->recovery) &&
> + bio_data_dir(bio) == WRITE &&
> + (mddev->reshape_backwards
> + ? (bio->bi_iter.bi_sector < conf->reshape_safe &&
> + bio->bi_iter.bi_sector + sectors > conf->reshape_progress)
> + : (bio->bi_iter.bi_sector + sectors > conf->reshape_safe &&
> + bio->bi_iter.bi_sector < conf->reshape_progress))) {
> + /* Need to update reshape_position in metadata */
> + mddev->reshape_position = conf->reshape_progress;
> + set_mask_bits(&mddev->flags, 0,
> + BIT(MD_CHANGE_DEVS) | BIT(MD_CHANGE_PENDING));
> + md_wakeup_thread(mddev->thread);
> + wait_event(mddev->sb_wait,
> + !test_bit(MD_CHANGE_PENDING, &mddev->flags));
> +
> + conf->reshape_safe = mddev->reshape_position;
> + }
this is write only and could be moved to write path.
> +
> + r10_bio = mempool_alloc(conf->r10bio_pool, GFP_NOIO);
> +
> + r10_bio->master_bio = bio;
> + r10_bio->sectors = sectors;
> +
> + r10_bio->mddev = mddev;
> + r10_bio->sector = bio->bi_iter.bi_sector;
> + r10_bio->state = 0;
> +
> + /* We might need to issue multiple reads to different
> + * devices if there are bad blocks around, so we keep
> + * track of the number of reads in bio->bi_phys_segments.
> + * If this is 0, there is only one r10_bio and no locking
> + * will be needed when the request completes. If it is
> + * non-zero, then it is the number of not-completed requests.
> + */
> + bio->bi_phys_segments = 0;
> + bio_clear_flag(bio, BIO_SEG_VALID);
> +
> + if (bio_data_dir(bio) == READ) {
> + raid10_read_request(mddev, bio, r10_bio);
> + return;
> + }
Better do the same as raid1 here.
> + raid10_write_request(mddev, bio, r10_bio);
> +}
Thanks,
Shaohua
--
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
