Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755552AbXE3Qz1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2007 12:55:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752543AbXE3QzM (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2007 12:55:12 -0400 Received: from iriserv.iradimed.com ([72.242.190.170]:17749 "EHLO iradimed.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751667AbXE3QzK (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2007 12:55:10 -0400 Message-ID: <465DAC72.1010201@cfl.rr.com> Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 12:55:14 -0400 From: Phillip Susi User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stefan Bader CC: Stefan Bader , device-mapper development , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe , David Chinner , Andreas Dilger , Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [dm-devel] Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md. References: <18006.38689.818186.221707@notabene.brown> <18010.12472.209452.148229@notabene.brown> <20070528094358.GM25091@agk.fab.redhat.com> <5201e28f0705290225v14fdac44hb0382a4137a84d01@mail.gmail.com> <20070529220500.GA6513@agk.fab.redhat.com> <5201e28f0705300212g3be16464u5ee1a4c80db27a11@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5201e28f0705300212g3be16464u5ee1a4c80db27a11@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 May 2007 16:55:20.0241 (UTC) FILETIME=[4E87D210:01C7A2DB] X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-7.2.0.1122-3.6.1039-15208.000 X-TM-AS-Result: No--3.451100-5.000000-2 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1136 Lines: 25 Stefan Bader wrote: > You got a linear target that consists of two disks. One drive (a) > supports barriers and the other one (b) doesn't. Device-mapper just > maps the requests to the appropriate disk. Now the following sequence > happens: > > 1. block x gets mapped to drive b > 2. block y (with barrier) gets mapped to drive a > > Since drive a supports barrier request we don't get -EOPNOTSUPP but > the request with block y might get written before block x since the > disk are independent. I guess the chances of this are quite low since > at some point a barrier request will also hit drive b but for the time > being it might be better to indicate -EOPNOTSUPP right from > device-mapper. The device mapper needs to ensure that ALL underlying devices get a barrier request when one comes down from above, even if it has to construct zero length barriers to send to most of them. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/