On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 21:30:19 -0500 Jonathan Brassow <jbrassow@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Neil, > > I've cleaned up the first two patches I sent earlier: > [1 of 5] dm-raid-set-recovery-flags-on-resume.patch > [2 of 5] dm-raid-record-and-handle-missing-devices.patch > and added a couple more: > [3 of 5] dm-raid-need-safe-version-of-rdev_for_each.patch > [4 of 5] dm-raid-use-md_error-in-place-of-faulty-bit.patch > [5 of 5] md-raid1-further-conditionalize-fullsync.patch > > Patch [5 of 5] I think needs some work. It fixes the problem I'm seeing > and seems to go along with similar logic used for RAID5 in commit > d6b212f4b19da5301e6b6eca562e5c7a2a6e8c8d. It also seems like a workable > solution based on the code surrounding commit > d30519fc59c5cc2f7772fa67b16b1a2426d36c95. Can you let me know if I'm > stretching the usage of 'saved_raid_disk' too far? > > Thanks, > brassow Thanks. 3-of-5 should go in 3.4 presumably. The rest wait for 3.5? Or do you think they should be in 3.4? 5-of-5: Maybe it would make sense just to check if saved_raid_disk >= 0 ?? This is only relevant for dm-raid isn't it? I'd need to think through how all that fits together again. The rest are all fine and are in my for-next Thanks, NeilBrown
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
