On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 12:27:03AM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote:
> Blanking a WWID is a dangerous operation. E.g. configure() would
> consider the path in question as invalid and orphan it if the
> WWID is blank. Don't do this for possibly transient checker failures.
> Moreover, we try to determine WWID even if path_offline returns
> PATH_DOWN in the first place, so why should we not if the checker
> has a problem?
>
Is PATH_WILD a transient error? Clearly we have cases where
PATH_UNCHECKED happens because of a transient error. What's the case
that you are worried about where we temporarily get a PATH_WILD, but we
think we should continue will setting up the path?
> Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck <mwi...@suse.com>
> ---
> libmultipath/discovery.c | 3 ---
> 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/libmultipath/discovery.c b/libmultipath/discovery.c
> index 3550c3a7..467ece7a 100644
> --- a/libmultipath/discovery.c
> +++ b/libmultipath/discovery.c
> @@ -1944,9 +1944,6 @@ int pathinfo(struct path *pp, struct config *conf, int
> mask)
> if (path_state == PATH_UP) {
> pp->chkrstate = pp->state = get_state(pp, conf, 0,
> path_state);
> - if (pp->state == PATH_UNCHECKED ||
> - pp->state == PATH_WILD)
> - goto blank;
> if (pp->state == PATH_TIMEOUT)
> pp->state = PATH_DOWN;
> if (pp->state == PATH_UP && !pp->size) {
> --
> 2.19.0
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
