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