Re: [PATCH -next 2/3] md/raid10: convert resync_lock to use seqlock

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 9/2/22 2:41 AM, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
Hi,

On 2022-08-29 07:15, Yu Kuai wrote:
From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx>

Currently, wait_barrier() will hold 'resync_lock' to read 'conf->barrier',
and io can't be dispatched until 'barrier' is dropped.

Since holding the 'barrier' is not common, convert 'resync_lock' to use
seqlock so that holding lock can be avoided in fast path.

Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx>
I've found some lockdep issues starting with this patch in md-next while
running mdadm tests (specifically 00raid10 when run about 10 times in a
row).

I've seen a couple different lock dep errors. The first seems to be
reproducible on this patch, then it possibly changes to the second on
subsequent patches. Not sure exactly.

That's why I said "try mdadm test suites too to avoid regression." ...

Guoqing



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux