Mark Lord <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > That's if we think -stable needs this fixed.
>
> Let's say a bunch of read bio's get coalesced into a single
> 200+ sector request. This then fails on one single bad sector
> out of the 200+. Without the patch, there is a very good chance
> that sd.c will simply fail the entire request, all 200+ sectors.
>
> With the patch, it will fail the first block, and then retry
> the remaining blocks. And repeat this until something works,
> or until everything has failed one by one.
Yowch. I have the feeling that this'll take our EIO-handling time from
far-too-long to far-too-long*200.
I am still traumatised by my recent ten-minute wait for a dodgy DVD to
become ejectable.
I don't think -stable needs this, personally.
> Better, but still not the best.
>
> What I need to have happen when a request is failed due to bad-media,
> is have it split the request into a sequence of single-block requests
> that are passed to the LLD one at a time. The ones with real bad
> sectors will then be independently failed, and the rest will get done.
>
> Much better. Much more complex.
>
> I'm thinking about something like that, just not sure whether to put it
> (initially) in libata, sd.c, or the block layer.
block, I suspect. My DVD trauma was IDE-induced. Jens is mulling the
problem - I'd suggest you coordinate with him.
It would be a good thing to fix.
It's moderately hard to test, though. Easy enough for DVDs and CDs, but
it's harder to take a marker pen to a hard drive.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
