md/raid5: allow 5-device RAID6 to be reshaped to 4-device.

There is a bug in 'check_reshape' for raid5.c  To checks
that the new minimum number of devices is large enough (which is
good), but it does so also after the reshape has started (bad).

This is bad because
 - the calculation is now wrong as mddev->raid_disks has changed
   already, and
 - it is pointless because it is now too late to stop.

So only perform that test when reshape has not been committed to.

Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
md/raid10: fix bug which causes all RAID10 reshapes to move no data.

The recent comment:
commit 7e83ccbecd608b971f340e951c9e84cd0343002f
    md/raid10: Allow skipping recovery when clean arrays are assembled

Causes raid10 to skip a recovery in certain cases where it is safe to
do so.  Unfortunately it also causes a reshape to be skipped which is
never safe.  The result is that an attempt to reshape a RAID10 will
appear to complete instantly, but no data will have been moves so the
array will now contain garbage.
(If nothing is written, you can recovery by simple performing the
reverse reshape which will also complete instantly).

Bug was introduced in 3.10, so this is suitable for 3.10-stable.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org (3.10)
Cc: Martin Wilck <mwilck@arcor.de>
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
raid5: create multiple threads to handle stripes

This is a new tempt to make raid5 handle stripes in multiple threads, as
suggested by Neil to have maxium flexibility and better numa binding. It
basically is a combination of my first and second generation patches. By
default, no multiple thread is enabled (all stripes are handled by raid5d).

An example to enable multiple threads:
#echo 3 > /sys/block/md0/md/auxthread_number
This will create 3 auxiliary threads to handle stripes. The threads can run
on any cpus and handle stripes produced by any cpus.

#echo 1-3 > /sys/block/md0/md/auxth0/cpulist
This will bind auxiliary thread 0 to cpu 1-3, and this thread will only handle
stripes produced by cpu 1-3. User tool can further change the thread's
affinity, but the thread can only handle stripes produced by cpu 1-3 till the
sysfs entry is changed again.

If stripes produced by a CPU aren't handled by any auxiliary thread, such
stripes will be handled by raid5d. Otherwise, raid5d doesn't handle any
stripes.

Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@fusionio.com>
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
raid5: make release_stripe lockless

release_stripe still has big lock contention. We just add the stripe to a llist
without taking device_lock. We let the raid5d thread to do the real stripe
release, which must hold device_lock anyway. In this way, release_stripe
doesn't hold any locks.

The side effect is the released stripes order is changed. But sounds not a big
deal, stripes are never handled in order. And I thought block layer can already
do nice request merge, which means order isn't that important.

I kept the unplug release batch, which is unnecessary with this patch from lock
contention avoid point of view, and actually if we delete it, the stripe_head
release_list and lru can share storage. But the unplug release batch is also
helpful for request merge. We probably can delay wakeup raid5d till unplug, but
I'm still afraid of the case which raid5d is running.

Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@fusionio.com>
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
md: fix dev_sectors when data_offset changes.

Not sure about this yet...