On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 12:21 AM Xiao Ni <xni@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Matthew > > Thanks very much for those test. And as you said, it's better to wait > more test results. > By the way, do you know the date of 5.13 merge window? 5.13 merge window will be April (about 2 months from now). I applied the set to md-next. Thanks, Song > > Regards > Xiao > > On 02/15/2021 12:05 PM, Matthew Ruffell wrote: > > Hi Xiao, > > > > Thanks for posting the patchset. I have been testing them over the past week, > > and they are looking good. > > > > I backported [0] the patchset to the Ubuntu 4.15, 5.4 and 5.8 kernels, and I have > > been testing them on public clouds. > > > > [0] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1896578/comments/13 > > > > For performance, formatting a Raid10 array on NVMe disks drops from 8.5 minutes > > to about 6 seconds [1], on AWS i3.8xlarge with 4x 1.7TB disks, due to the > > speedup in block discard. > > > > [1] https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/NNGqP3xdsc/ > > > > I have also tested the data corruption reproducer from my original problem > > report [2], and I have found that throughout each of the steps of formatting the > > array, doing a consistency check, writing data, doing a consistency check, > > issuing a fstrim, doing a consistency check, the /sys/block/md0/md/mismatch_cnt > > was always 0, and all deep fsck checks came back clean for individual disks [3]. > > > > [2] https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg3765302.html > > [3] https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/5DK57TzdFH/ > > > > So I think your patches do solve the data corruption problem. Great job. > > > > To try and get some more eyes on the patches, I have provided my test kernels to > > 5 other users who are hitting the Raid10 block discard performance problem, and > > I have asked them to test on spare test servers, and to provide feedback on > > performance and data safety. > > > > I will let you know their feedback as it comes in. > > > > As for getting this merged, I actually agree with Song, the 5.12 merge window > > is happening right now, and it is a bit too soon for large changes like this. > > I think we should wait for the 5.13 merge window. That way we can do some more > > testing, get feedback from some users, and make sure we don't cause any more > > data corruption regressions. > > > > I will write back soon with some user feedback and more test results. > > > > Thanks, > > Matthew > > >
