Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753484Ab0HWN7B (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:59:01 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45853 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752594Ab0HWN64 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:58:56 -0400 Message-ID: <4C727E96.5020801@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:58:46 -0400 From: Ric Wheeler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100806 Fedora/3.1.2-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christoph Hellwig CC: Tejun Heo , jaxboe@fusionio.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, James.Bottomley@suse.de, tytso@mit.edu, chris.mason@oracle.com, swhiteho@redhat.com, konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp, dm-devel@redhat.com, vst@vlnb.net, jack@suse.cz, hare@suse.de Subject: Re: [PATCHSET block#for-2.6.36-post] block: replace barrier with sequenced flush References: <1281616891-5691-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20100820132214.GA6184@lst.de> <4C6E9CAF.5010202@redhat.com> <4C7269E9.9070304@kernel.org> <20100823124815.GA20095@lst.de> In-Reply-To: <20100823124815.GA20095@lst.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1193 Lines: 28 On 08/23/2010 08:48 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 02:30:33PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: >> It might be useful to give several example configurations with >> different cache configurations. I don't have much experience with >> battery backed arrays but aren't they suppose to report write through >> cache automatically? > > They usually do. I have one that doesn't, but SYNCHRONIZE CACHE on > it is so fast that it effectively must be a no-op. > Arrays are not a problem in general - they normally have internally, redundant batteries to hold up the cache. The issue is when you have an internal hardware RAID card with a large cache. Those cards sit in your server and the batteries on the card protect its internal cache, but do not have the capacity to hold up the drives behind it. Normally, those drives should have their write cache disabled, but sometimes (especially with S-ATA disks) this is not done. ric -- 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/