> > disk from container to let the process of rebuilding the array with
> failed
> > member. If the disk is physically pulled out of the system, the disk
> is removed
> > from container automatically by exiting udev rules.
>
> This mostly makes sense, though...
>
> >
> > + /*
> > + * If there are any failed disks check state of the other volume.
> > + * Block rebuild if the other one is failed until failed disks
> > + * are removed from container.
> > + */
>
> This comment was a lot clearer to me that the description at the top :-
> )
OK, I will add this remark at the top of patch description.
>
> However:
> > + if (failed) {
> > + dprintf("found failed disks in %s, check if there is
> another"
> > + "sub-array\n",
> > + dev->volume);
> > + /* check the state of the other volume allows for rebuild
> */
> > + allowed = imsm_rebuild_allowed(a, (inst == 0) ? 1 : 0,
> failed);
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> This seems to imply that there are only ever at most 2 volumes in a
> container. Is that really true? The rest of the code seems to assume
> that
> there could be several.
There are at most two sub-array in one array.
This patch is based on the previous one, as it checks the state of DISK_REMOVED.
Thanks for comments,
Marcin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
