On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 2:01 AM, Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
quoted text
>
> On Friday May 9, snitzer@gmail.com wrote:

quoted text
>  > Unfortunately my testing with this patch results in a full resync.
>  >
>  > Here is the state of the array after shutdown:
>  > # mdadm -X /dev/nbd0 /dev/sdq
>  >         Filename : /dev/nbd0
>  >            Magic : 6d746962
>  >          Version : 4
>  >             UUID : 7140cc3c:8681416c:12c5668a:984ca55d
>  >           Events : 896
>  >   Events Cleared : 897
>
>  Events Cleared is *larger* than Events!!! Is that repeatable?  I can
>  only see it happening if a very small race were lost.  You don't have
>  any other patches in there do you?

Yes, it is repeatable with your previous patch.  But with your most
recent patch I had the following after shutdown:

# mdadm -X /dev/nbd0 /dev/sdq
        Filename : /dev/nbd0
          Events : 1732
  Events Cleared : 1732
          Bitmap : 409600 bits (chunks), 1 dirty (0.0%)

        Filename : /dev/sdq
          Events : 1736
  Events Cleared : 1736
          Bitmap : 409600 bits (chunks), 1 dirty (0.0%)

Unfortunately sdq's events_cleared appears to have been updated
_after_ the array became degraded.
As such a full resync occurred because 1732 < 1736.

quoted text
>  This patch should close the race, though I still find it hard to
>  believe that you lost the race.

Comments inlined below.

quoted text
>  Signed-off-by: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
>
>  ### Diffstat output
>   ./drivers/md/bitmap.c |   20 +++++++++++++++-----
>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
>
>  diff .prev/drivers/md/bitmap.c ./drivers/md/bitmap.c
>  --- .prev/drivers/md/bitmap.c   2008-05-09 11:02:13.000000000 +1000
>  +++ ./drivers/md/bitmap.c       2008-05-09 16:00:07.000000000 +1000
>
> @@ -465,8 +465,6 @@ void bitmap_update_sb(struct bitmap *bit
>         spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bitmap->lock, flags);
>         sb = (bitmap_super_t *)kmap_atomic(bitmap->sb_page, KM_USER0);
>         sb->events = cpu_to_le64(bitmap->mddev->events);
>  -       if (!bitmap->mddev->degraded)
>  -               sb->events_cleared = cpu_to_le64(bitmap->mddev->events);

Before, events_cleared was _not_ updated if the array was degraded.
Your patch doesn't appear to maintain that design.

I tried adding the following degraded check to your below conditional
but that resulted in nbd0's events < mddev->bitmap->events_cleared
again, so I'm back to square one:

                        if (!bitmap->mddev->degraded &&
                            bitmap->events_cleared < bitmap->mddev->events) {

In addition no bits were set in sdq's bitmap:
# mdadm -X /dev/nbd0 /dev/sdq
        Filename : /dev/nbd0
          Events : 2616
  Events Cleared : 2617
          Bitmap : 409600 bits (chunks), 0 dirty (0.0%)

        Filename : /dev/sdq
          Events : 2618
  Events Cleared : 2617
          Bitmap : 409600 bits (chunks), 0 dirty (0.0%)

quoted text
>  @@ -1094,9 +1092,21 @@ void bitmap_daemon_work(struct bitmap *b
>
>                         } else
>                                 spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bitmap->lock, flags);
>                         lastpage = page;
>  -/*
>  -                       printk("bitmap clean at page %lu\n", j);
>  -*/
>  +
>  +                       /* We are possibly going to clear some bits, so make
>  +                        * sure that events_cleared is up-to-date.
>  +                        */
>  +                       if (bitmap->events_cleared < bitmap->mddev->events) {
>  +                               bitmap_super_t *sb;
>  +                               bitmap->events_cleared = bitmap->mddev->events;
>  +                               wait_event(mddev->sb_wait,
>  +                                   !test_bit(MD_CHANGE_CLEAN, &mddev->flags));

I needed "bitmap->mddev->sb_wait" and "bitmap->mddev->flags" to get
the code to compile.

Mike
--
unsubscribe notice
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/