From 8bce6d35b308d73cdb2ee273c95d711a55be688c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: NeilBrown Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 13:20:15 +1100 Subject: [PATCH] md/raid10: fix the 'new' raid10 layout to work correctly. In Linux 3.9 we introduce a new 'far' layout for RAID10 which was supposed to rotate the replicas differently and so provide better resilience. In particular it could survive more combinations of 2 drive failures. Unfortunately. due to a coding error, this some did what was wanted, sometimes improved less than we hoped, and sometimes - in very unlikely circumstances - put multiple replicas on the same device so the redundancy was harmed. No public user-space tool has created arrays using this layout so it is very unlikely that zero-redundancy arrays actually exist. Probably no arrays using any form of the new layout exist. But we cannot be certain. So use another bit in the 'layout' number and introduce a bug-fixed version of the layout. Also when assembling an array, if it has a zero-redundancy layout, give a warning. Reported-by: Heinz Mauelshagen Signed-off-by: NeilBrown --- drivers/md/raid10.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/md/raid10.c b/drivers/md/raid10.c index 23de2144ee13..96f365968306 100644 --- a/drivers/md/raid10.c +++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ * far_copies (stored in second byte of layout) * far_offset (stored in bit 16 of layout ) * use_far_sets (stored in bit 17 of layout ) + * use_far_sets_bugfixed (stored in bit 18 of layout ) * * The data to be stored is divided into chunks using chunksize. Each device * is divided into far_copies sections. In each section, chunks are laid out @@ -1497,6 +1498,8 @@ static void status(struct seq_file *seq, struct mddev *mddev) seq_printf(seq, " %d offset-copies", conf->geo.far_copies); else seq_printf(seq, " %d far-copies", conf->geo.far_copies); + if (conf->geo.far_set_size != conf->geo.raid_disks) + seq_printf(seq, " %d devices per set", conf->geo.far_set_size); } seq_printf(seq, " [%d/%d] [", conf->geo.raid_disks, conf->geo.raid_disks - mddev->degraded); @@ -3394,7 +3397,7 @@ static int setup_geo(struct geom *geo, struct mddev *mddev, enum geo_type new) disks = mddev->raid_disks + mddev->delta_disks; break; } - if (layout >> 18) + if (layout >> 19) return -1; if (chunk < (PAGE_SIZE >> 9) || !is_power_of_2(chunk)) @@ -3406,7 +3409,22 @@ static int setup_geo(struct geom *geo, struct mddev *mddev, enum geo_type new) geo->near_copies = nc; geo->far_copies = fc; geo->far_offset = fo; - geo->far_set_size = (layout & (1<<17)) ? disks / fc : disks; + switch (layout >> 17) { + case 0: /* original layout. simple but not always optimal */ + geo->far_set_size = disks; + break; + case 1: /* "improved" layout which was buggy. Hopefully no-one is + * actually using this, but leave code here just in case.*/ + geo->far_set_size = disks/fc; + WARN(geo->far_set_size < fc, + "This RAID10 layout does not provide data safety - please backup and create new array\n"); + break; + case 2: /* "improved" layout fixed to match documentation */ + geo->far_set_size = fc * nc; + break; + default: /* Not a valid layout */ + return -1; + } geo->chunk_mask = chunk - 1; geo->chunk_shift = ffz(~chunk); return nc*fc; -- 2.45.2