From patchwork Fri Oct 11 01:16:30 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Yu Kuai X-Patchwork-Id: 13831802 Received: from dggsgout12.his.huawei.com (dggsgout12.his.huawei.com [45.249.212.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5240217BD6; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 01:18:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.56 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728609514; cv=none; b=KywmqFMpUCtEkyYAdeOTPfRjDsWMf5nwciJcNtcjhKkZ4GnQYVcfM6E9XdmfMVsatSuacYumKW4Jfe05pi+l4yOTdT7VjiFOPOp4DiefHngEWlBC48bZ7QDhuU0pscrMLA9MjBicdmTwgj4T4sF/2lYVqp2bNViMQsv2d5iUNPc= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728609514; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mqb2dcUZiMVko5Dx0zcblh+CR9za0lNwy3EDHZ+oe8w=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=ZmstLArV74HUHAGUP9MzQVFc2NMJYFxN6aO2GPvp8wVpDJwVVRsNcMZSOrrhRjTri6JqyvbpDaZ9nHjEtr/r2Tnk4UZYCIT9eCkrbQB34u+upmKjCTBI4wz3eVzhTBUsMGyjd6Gl7VBi4J1OXFSJ3eS4h9zf4mY3NxP+siP/VSc= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huaweicloud.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huaweicloud.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huaweicloud.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huaweicloud.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.216]) by dggsgout12.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4XPpfD21RXz4f3jXl; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 09:18:12 +0800 (CST) Received: from mail02.huawei.com (unknown [10.116.40.128]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 307BC1A08FC; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 09:18:29 +0800 (CST) Received: from huaweicloud.com (unknown [10.175.104.67]) by APP4 (Coremail) with SMTP id gCh0CgDH+sbefAhnm9MFDw--.55490S11; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 09:18:29 +0800 (CST) From: Yu Kuai To: song@kernel.org, mariusz.tkaczyk@intel.com Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yukuai3@huawei.com, yukuai1@huaweicloud.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com, yangerkun@huawei.com Subject: [PATCH v2 7/7] md/raid5: don't set Faulty rdev for blocked_rdev Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 09:16:30 +0800 Message-Id: <20241011011630.2002803-8-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.2 In-Reply-To: <20241011011630.2002803-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> References: <20241011011630.2002803-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CM-TRANSID: gCh0CgDH+sbefAhnm9MFDw--.55490S11 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvdXoW7GF4ftFy5KF47GF1xWrWruFg_yoWkAFgEka 4fZFZ3Gr18CFn8Zw1DWryrZrWjkr1kuFn7W3WUKFWYvr98XrWUK3yjqFyUJw4Uua9I9rW5 Gw10gF1fXrZ3GjkaLaAFLSUrUUUUjb8apTn2vfkv8UJUUUU8Yxn0WfASr-VFAUDa7-sFnT 9fnUUIcSsGvfJTRUUUbD8FF20E14v26rWj6s0DM7CY07I20VC2zVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG 6rWj6s0DM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1j6r18M28IrcIa0xkI8VA2jI8067AKxVWUAVCq3wA2048vs2 IY020Ec7CjxVAFwI0_Xr0E3s1l8cAvFVAK0II2c7xJM28CjxkF64kEwVA0rcxSw2x7M28E F7xvwVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVW7JVWDJwA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVCY1x0267AKxVW8Jr0_Cr 1UM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVAFwI0_GcCE3s1l84ACjcxK6I8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26rxl6s0D M2AIxVAIcxkEcVAq07x20xvEncxIr21l5I8CrVACY4xI64kE6c02F40Ex7xfMcIj6xIIjx v20xvE14v26r1j6r18McIj6I8E87Iv67AKxVWUJVW8JwAm72CE4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_Gr1l F7xvr2IYc2Ij64vIr41lF7I21c0EjII2zVCS5cI20VAGYxC7MxkF7I0En4kS14v26r126r 1DMxAIw28IcxkI7VAKI48JMxC20s026xCaFVCjc4AY6r1j6r4UMI8I3I0E5I8CrVAFwI0_ Jr0_Jr4lx2IqxVCjr7xvwVAFwI0_JrI_JrWlx4CE17CEb7AF67AKxVWUtVW8ZwCIc40Y0x 0EwIxGrwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r1I6r4UMIIF0xvE2Ix0cI8IcVCY1x0267AKxVWx JVW8Jr1lIxAIcVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6r1j6r1xMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMI IF0xvEx4A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI0_Gr0_Gr1UYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x0JUvYLPUUUUU = X-CM-SenderInfo: 51xn3trlr6x35dzhxuhorxvhhfrp/ From: Yu Kuai Faulty rdev should never be accessed anymore, hence there is no point to wait for bad block to be acknowledged in this case while handling write request. Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai --- drivers/md/raid5.c | 13 ++++++------- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c index dc2ea636d173..f5ac81dd21b2 100644 --- a/drivers/md/raid5.c +++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c @@ -4724,14 +4724,13 @@ static void analyse_stripe(struct stripe_head *sh, struct stripe_head_state *s) if (rdev) { is_bad = rdev_has_badblock(rdev, sh->sector, RAID5_STRIPE_SECTORS(conf)); - if (s->blocked_rdev == NULL - && (test_bit(Blocked, &rdev->flags) - || is_bad < 0)) { + if (s->blocked_rdev == NULL) { if (is_bad < 0) - set_bit(BlockedBadBlocks, - &rdev->flags); - s->blocked_rdev = rdev; - atomic_inc(&rdev->nr_pending); + set_bit(BlockedBadBlocks, &rdev->flags); + if (rdev_blocked(rdev)) { + s->blocked_rdev = rdev; + atomic_inc(&rdev->nr_pending); + } } } clear_bit(R5_Insync, &dev->flags);