On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 14:04:13 +0000 "Czarnowska, Anna" <anna.czarnowska@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Neil Brown [mailto:neilb@xxxxxxx] > > Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2010 12:23 PM > > To: Czarnowska, Anna > > Cc: linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Williams, Dan J; Ciechanowski, Ed; > > Hawrylewicz Czarnowski, Przemyslaw; Labun, Marcin; Neubauer, Wojciech > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Assemble imsm spares in matching domain only > > > > > > Thanks for these three. > > > > I have applied the first, > > applied the seconds with a couple of changes as mentioned below, > > but I haven't applied the first. I don't like the fact that knowledge > > about > > imsm is explicitly hard-coded into mdadm.c All explicit knowledge > > about imsm > > should be in super-intel.c... > > > > I think you can make this work by adding some code in to Assemble() > > just near: > > /* Now reject spares that don't match domains of identified > > members */ > > > > at that point, if (!st || !st->sb), then we could include all those > > spares > > which have ->used == 3. > > i.e. when there are now more arrays to be found, all the spares get > > included > > into one last array. > > I have implemented it this way but: > (!st || !st->sb) does not necessarily mean we are assembling "last" array. > This also happens when we find no devices for an array from config file. > So if the first array is missing we take all spares into spare-container > and they don't have a chance to be matched with other arrays. > Should we ignore this case as a bad config? I think we should only automatically gather the spares when auto_assem is true. So the condition would be if (auto_assem && (!st || !st->sb)) > > With auto assembly if we have this condition it means we can take all spares > that did not match anything before. > This is what we want but there is another problem: we do not attempt auto assembly > if we manage to assemble anything from config file. > This means that when there is a good config file then > only the spares matching some array will be assembled. > We will not come back for the remaining ones. > > If mdadm.c is a bad place to force spares assembly then maybe it makes sense > to add an ARRAY line with uuid=0 as last array in config? > This would take care of spares that have different domains than all arrays. Yes, I think having an array with uuid=0 to collect all the remaining spares seems like a good idea. It may turn out not to work quite the way we want, but I think we should try it an get some experience with how well it works. I think it is at least close to the correct solution. Thanks, NeilBrown -- 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
