From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932366Ab1KWAe3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:34:29 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:42253 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932310Ab1KWAe0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:34:26 -0500 X-Mailbox-Line: From gregkh@clark.kroah.org Tue Nov 22 16:22:08 2011 Message-Id: <20111123002207.931408601@clark.kroah.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.48-20.1.2 Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 16:21:00 -0800 From: Greg KH To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org Cc: stable-review@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Dan Williams , NeilBrown Subject: [10/25] md/raid5: abort any pending parity operations when array fails. In-Reply-To: <20111123002222.GA2376@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2.6.32-longterm review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ Content-Length: 2351 Lines: 71 From: NeilBrown commit 9a3f530f39f4490eaa18b02719fb74ce5f4d2d86 upstream. When the number of failed devices exceeds the allowed number we must abort any active parity operations (checks or updates) as they are no longer meaningful, and can lead to a BUG_ON in handle_parity_checks6. This bug was introduce by commit 6c0069c0ae9659e3a91b68eaed06a5c6c37f45c8 in 2.6.29. Reported-by: Manish Katiyar Tested-by: Manish Katiyar Acked-by: Dan Williams Signed-off-by: NeilBrown Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- drivers/md/raid5.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) --- a/drivers/md/raid5.c +++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c @@ -3038,12 +3038,16 @@ static void handle_stripe5(struct stripe /* check if the array has lost two devices and, if so, some requests might * need to be failed */ - if (s.failed > 1 && s.to_read+s.to_write+s.written) - handle_failed_stripe(conf, sh, &s, disks, &return_bi); - if (s.failed > 1 && s.syncing) { - md_done_sync(conf->mddev, STRIPE_SECTORS,0); - clear_bit(STRIPE_SYNCING, &sh->state); - s.syncing = 0; + if (s.failed > 1) { + sh->check_state = 0; + sh->reconstruct_state = 0; + if (s.to_read+s.to_write+s.written) + handle_failed_stripe(conf, sh, &s, disks, &return_bi); + if (s.syncing) { + md_done_sync(conf->mddev, STRIPE_SECTORS,0); + clear_bit(STRIPE_SYNCING, &sh->state); + s.syncing = 0; + } } /* might be able to return some write requests if the parity block @@ -3314,12 +3318,16 @@ static void handle_stripe6(struct stripe /* check if the array has lost >2 devices and, if so, some requests * might need to be failed */ - if (s.failed > 2 && s.to_read+s.to_write+s.written) - handle_failed_stripe(conf, sh, &s, disks, &return_bi); - if (s.failed > 2 && s.syncing) { - md_done_sync(conf->mddev, STRIPE_SECTORS,0); - clear_bit(STRIPE_SYNCING, &sh->state); - s.syncing = 0; + if (s.failed > 2) { + sh->check_state = 0; + sh->reconstruct_state = 0; + if (s.to_read+s.to_write+s.written) + handle_failed_stripe(conf, sh, &s, disks, &return_bi); + if (s.syncing) { + md_done_sync(conf->mddev, STRIPE_SECTORS,0); + clear_bit(STRIPE_SYNCING, &sh->state); + s.syncing = 0; + } } /*