"Verma, Vishal L" <vishal.l.verma@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 2015-11-25 at 10:37 -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote: >> "Verma, Vishal L" <vishal.l.verma@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 14:14 -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote: >> > > >> > > I'm not sure whether it makes sense to continue without badblock >> > > management for the RAID code. I was hoping Neil would comment on >> > > that. >> > > >> > > -Jeff >> > >> > Not sure I follow? I believe I've kept all the badblocks >> > functionality >> > RAID already had.. >> >> What I mean to say is that the RAID code had previously embedded the >> badblocks structure in one of its other data structures. As a result, >> you would never get an allocation failure for it. >> > Ah I see - I don't think that has effectively changed. 'rdev' still > contains a statically allocated badblocks structure (as opposed to > gendisk, which just stores a pointer). md used to dynamically allocate > the storage space inside badblocks (bb->page), and that is still the > case using badblocks_init. Ah, ok. Sorry I didn't dig into that further. Thanks, Jeff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
