Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230522115449.2203939-1-linan666@huaweicloud.com>
 <20230522115449.2203939-3-linan666@huaweicloud.com> <801a3a11-9a2c-dca2-cec4-4a9c71d3afb6@huaweicloud.com>
In-Reply-To: <801a3a11-9a2c-dca2-cec4-4a9c71d3afb6@huaweicloud.com>
From:   Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 22 May 2023 09:03:14 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW6UTc+sdVKvYqDX1VN3u9VgmkNVo0b84AxG=DdOY7pfhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] md/raid10: fix incorrect done of recovery
To:     Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
Cc:     linan666@huaweicloud.com, shli@fb.com, allenpeng@synology.com,
        alexwu@synology.com, bingjingc@synology.com, neilb@suse.de,
        linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linan122@huawei.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com, houtao1@huawei.com,
        yangerkun@huawei.com, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 6:54=E2=80=AFAM Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> w=
rote:
>
> Hi,
>
> =E5=9C=A8 2023/05/22 19:54, linan666@huaweicloud.com =E5=86=99=E9=81=93:
> > From: Li Nan <linan122@huawei.com>
> >
> > Recovery will go to giveup and let chunks_skipped++ in
> > raid10_sync_request() if there are some bad_blocks, and it will return
> > max_sector when chunks_skipped >=3D geo.raid_disks. Now, recovery fail =
and
> > data is inconsistent but user think recovery is done, it is wrong.
> >
> > Fix it by set mirror's recovery_disabled and spare device shouln't be
> > added to here.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Li Nan <linan122@huawei.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/md/raid10.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> >   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/md/raid10.c b/drivers/md/raid10.c
> > index e21502c03b45..70cc87c7ee57 100644
> > --- a/drivers/md/raid10.c
> > +++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c
> > @@ -3303,6 +3303,7 @@ static sector_t raid10_sync_request(struct mddev =
*mddev, sector_t sector_nr,
> >       int chunks_skipped =3D 0;
> >       sector_t chunk_mask =3D conf->geo.chunk_mask;
> >       int page_idx =3D 0;
> > +     int error_disk =3D -1;
> >
> >       /*
> >        * Allow skipping a full rebuild for incremental assembly
> > @@ -3386,7 +3387,18 @@ static sector_t raid10_sync_request(struct mddev=
 *mddev, sector_t sector_nr,
> >               return reshape_request(mddev, sector_nr, skipped);
> >
> >       if (chunks_skipped >=3D conf->geo.raid_disks) {
> > -             /* if there has been nothing to do on any drive,
> > +             pr_err("md/raid10:%s: %s fail\n", mdname(mddev),
> > +                     test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_SYNC, &mddev->recovery) ?  "=
resync" : "recovery");
>
> Line exceed 80 columns, and following.

If it makes the code look better, such as in this case, it is OK to have
lines longer than 80 columns.

Thanks,
Song

> > +             if (error_disk >=3D 0 && !test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_SYNC, &mdd=
ev->recovery)) {
>