On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 10:22:52AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> Heinz Mauelshagen wrote:
>
> > that's what the t_group type is for.
>
> I'm confused about what you meant by that--in the isw handler, the
> raid_devs created in _create_rd are suppsoed to have
>
> > Is there a reason, why you couldn't use that as already down
> > for Intel Software RAID (iswc.[ch]) and designed for other flavours
> > such as DDF ?
>
> Actually, I had no idea that isw was creating extra raid_devs in
> group_rd; from my perspective, I had simply thought that it made sense
> for read_raid_dev to create all the raid_devs that were required and to
> push all of those raid_devs through setup_rd, instead of creating one
> raid_dev per disk in read_raid_dev and adding the rest later. However,
> it seems a little weird to me that under that scheme one doesn't see all
> the raid_devs until after isw_group is called.
Well, a raid_dev always is a whole single device for all possible mappings.
OTOH there can be multiple raid_sets mapped to a particular raid_dev
(of course to a group of those), which should cover what you want and
is already done in isw.
E.g. 2 mirrors one after the other mapped to 2 raid_devs.
>
> But, I suppose it wouldn't be too difficult to reroll the patches to do
> it that way too.
That would be great, thanks.
Heinz
>
> --D
>
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Heinz Mauelshagen Red Hat GmbH
Consulting Development Engineer Am Sonnenhang 11
Storage Development 56242 Marienrachdorf
Germany
Mauelshagen@xxxxxxxxxx PHONE +49 171 7803392
FAX +49 2626 924446
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
_______________________________________________
Ataraid-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list
