[PATCH] imsm: FIX: Do not write check-point "0"

When 2 arrays are configured in container and arrays are reassembled during
rebuild or initialization, checkpoint for one array can be reset. It depends
on arrays assembly order.

Scenario:
1. Create 2 arrays (e.g. raid5)
2. Add spare to container
3. Degrade arrays /rebuild starts on array #1 and continues to n%/
4. Reassembly arrays
5. Rebuild starts on array #2 /because of assembly order/ from 0%
6. On first checkpoint stored for array #2 (non 0 value), checkpoint
for array #1 is cleared /it is delayed rebuild in md, so progress is 0/
7. Rebuild on #1 starts from n% /it was configured before checkpoint
was cleared/.

Any next reassembly during rebuild of #2 array (after p.6) causes
checkpoint information lost for array #1.

Solution is not store checkpoint for progress == 0.
Checkpoint is set to 0 when rebuild/initialization starts.

Note: Please apply this patch on master branch.

Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek
---

super-intel.c | 1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c
index 83135a6..0956c92 100644
--- a/super-intel.c
+++ b/super-intel.c
@@ -5479,6 +5479,7 @@ mark_checkpoint:
* curr_migr_unit needs updating
*/
if (units32 == units &&
+ units32 != 0 &&
__le32_to_cpu(dev->vol.curr_migr_unit) != units32) {
dprintf("imsm: mark checkpoint (%u)\n", units32);
dev->vol.curr_migr_unit = __cpu_to_le32(units32);

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] imsm: FIX: Do not write check-point "0"

On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 16:29:21 +0200 Adam Kwolek wrote:

> When 2 arrays are configured in container and arrays are reassembled during
> rebuild or initialization, checkpoint for one array can be reset. It depends
> on arrays assembly order.
>
> Scenario:
> 1. Create 2 arrays (e.g. raid5)
> 2. Add spare to container
> 3. Degrade arrays /rebuild starts on array #1 and continues to n%/
> 4. Reassembly arrays
> 5. Rebuild starts on array #2 /because of assembly order/ from 0%
> 6. On first checkpoint stored for array #2 (non 0 value), checkpoint
> for array #1 is cleared /it is delayed rebuild in md, so progress is 0/
> 7. Rebuild on #1 starts from n% /it was configured before checkpoint
> was cleared/.
>
> Any next reassembly during rebuild of #2 array (after p.6) causes
> checkpoint information lost for array #1.
>
> Solution is not store checkpoint for progress == 0.
> Checkpoint is set to 0 when rebuild/initialization starts.
>
> Note: Please apply this patch on master branch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek
> ---

Applied, thanks.

NeilBrown


>
> super-intel.c | 1 +
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c
> index 83135a6..0956c92 100644
> --- a/super-intel.c
> +++ b/super-intel.c
> @@ -5479,6 +5479,7 @@ mark_checkpoint:
> * curr_migr_unit needs updating
> */
> if (units32 == units &&
> + units32 != 0 &&
> __le32_to_cpu(dev->vol.curr_migr_unit) != units32) {
> dprintf("imsm: mark checkpoint (%u)\n", units32);
> dev->vol.curr_migr_unit = __cpu_to_le32(units32);
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html