Re: dm core patches

From: Joe Thornber
Date: Fri Feb 13 2004 - 09:09:06 EST


On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 07:51:45PM +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> I checked the archives, but I couldn't find anything really 'in flux'.
> Your priority based approach seems just fine to me.
>
> What is still missing? This is really a killer feature for 2.6. Any help
> I can offer?

I think the main concern now is over the testing of paths. Sending an
io down an inactive path can be very expensive for some hardware
configurations. So I'm considering changing a couple of things:

- Only ever send io to 1 priority group at a time (even test ios).
To test the lower priority groups we'd have to periodically switch to
them and use them for a bit for both test io and proper io.

- For some hardware there are better ways of testing the path than
sending the test io. Should the drivers expose a test function ?
In the absence of this we'd fallback to the test io method.

The other thing we need is to try and get the drivers to deferentiate
between a media error and a path error, so that media errors get
reported up quickly and don't cause false path failures. This is
possibly an area that you could help with ?

- Joe
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/