From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263646AbTDTRfm (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:35:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263647AbTDTRfm (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:35:42 -0400 Received: from siaab2ab.compuserve.com ([149.174.40.130]:61242 "EHLO siaab2ab.compuserve.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263646AbTDTRfl (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:35:41 -0400 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:44:35 -0400 From: Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Are linux-fs's drive-fault-tolerant by concept? To: "arjanv@redhat.com" Cc: linux-kernel Message-ID: <200304201347_MC3-1-353A-3A32@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> You will if it writes and fails to read back. The disk can't invent a >> sector that is gone. > > but linux can if you use an raid1 mirror... maybe we should teach the md > layer to write back the data from the other disk on a "bad sector" > error. NTFS does this in the filesystem by moving the affected cluster somewhere else, then marking it bad in its allocation map. Of course in order to do that it has to get notifications from the ft disk driver... ------ Chuck