On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 02:06:23AM +0800, Brad Campbell wrote: > On 16/06/17 23:52, Shaohua Li wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 01:26:00PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > > > If an md device is left suspended, then the current code will block IO > > > indefinitely. This patch will at a 20minute times to every single > > > request, which will mean IO proceeds, but extremely slowly. I don't see > > > that as a useful improvement. > > > > It returns error, so application will not dispatch more IO. But I agree a > > timeout to clear the suspend looks a better policy. > > If you insist on doing this, make the default timeout configurable and set > it to wait forever by default. That way there is no change in current > behaviour. That's meaningless if the default is wait forever > There are a number of times I've tickled those values to suspend things > while doing something sinister to the array. I'd be mighty upset if I got > called away and came back to find the kernel had resumed underneath me > because it thinks it knows best. I'd like to know your use case, can you describe it in details? I thought only raid6check uses this function. If there are other usage cases which depend on current behavior, we certaily can't change it. 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
