[lkml]   [2006]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] PATCH to fix rescan_partitions to return errors properly - take 2
Erik Mouw wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 01:32:34PM -0700, Suzuki Kp wrote:
>>Btw, do you think it is a good idea to let the other partition checkers
>>run, even if one of them has failed ?
> Yes, just let them run. Partition information doesn't need to be on the
> very first sector of the drive. If the first sector is bad and the
> partition table for your funky XYZ partition table format lives on the
> tenth sector, then a checker that checks the first sector would fail
> and prevent your checker from running.
> OTOH: having ten partition checkers check the same bad first sector
> doesn't really speed up the partion check process (for that reason we
> disable partition checking for drives we get for recovery). A way to
> solve that would be to keep a list of bad sectors: if the first checker
> finds a bad sector, it notes it down in the list so the next checker
> wouldn't have to try to read that particular sector. Maybe that's too
> much work to do in kernel and we'd better move the partition checking
> to userland.
>>Right now, the check_partition runs the partition checkers in a
>>sequential manner, until it finds a success or an error.
> I think it's best not to change the current behaviour and let all
> partition checkers run, even if one of them failed due to device
> errors. I wouldn't mind if the behaviour changed like you propose,
> though.
At present, the partition checkers doesn't run, if one of the preceeding
checker has reported an error ! *But*, some of the checkers doesn't
report the I/O error which they came across! So, this may let others
run. Thats not we want, right. We would like them to return I/O errors,
and and the check_partition should let other partition checkers continue.

Comments ?


> Erik

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-10-06 19:47    [W:0.099 / U:2.552 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site