Artur Paszkiewicz <artur.paszkiewicz@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 12/05/2016 10:50 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> Artur Paszkiewicz <artur.paszkiewicz@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> This extends the --rwh-policy parameter to work also in Misc mode. Using
>>> it changes the currently active RWH policy in the kernel driver and
>>> updates the metadata to make this change permanent. Updating metadata is
>>> not yet implemented for super1, so this is limited to IMSM for now.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Artur Paszkiewicz <artur.paszkiewicz@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Hi Artur,
>>
>> It looked good all the way up until 6/7, but there is a nit here:
>>
>>> ---
>>> Manage.c | 79
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> mdadm.c | 9 +++++++
>>> mdadm.h | 1 +
>>> super-intel.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> 4 files changed, 153 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> [snip]
>>> diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c
>>> index e524ef0..3b40429 100644
>>> --- a/super-intel.c
>>> +++ b/super-intel.c
>>> @@ -448,6 +448,7 @@ enum imsm_update_type {
>>> update_general_migration_checkpoint,
>>> update_size_change,
>>> update_prealloc_badblocks_mem,
>>> + update_rwh_policy,
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct imsm_update_activate_spare {
>>> @@ -540,6 +541,12 @@ struct imsm_update_prealloc_bb_mem {
>>> enum imsm_update_type type;
>>> };
>>>
>>> +struct imsm_update_rwh_policy {
>>> + enum imsm_update_type type;
>>> + int new_policy;
>>> + int dev_idx;
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> static const char *_sys_dev_type[] = {
>>> [SYS_DEV_UNKNOWN] = "Unknown",
>>> [SYS_DEV_SAS] = "SAS",
>>> @@ -3175,7 +3182,6 @@ static void getinfo_super_imsm_volume(struct supertype *st, struct mdinfo *info,
>>> info->custom_array_size <<= 32;
>>> info->custom_array_size |= __le32_to_cpu(dev->size_low);
>>> info->recovery_blocked = imsm_reshape_blocks_arrays_changes(st->sb);
>>> - info->journal_clean = dev->rwh_policy;
>>>
>>> if (is_gen_migration(dev)) {
>>> info->reshape_active = 1;
>>> @@ -3347,6 +3353,8 @@ static void getinfo_super_imsm_volume(struct supertype *st, struct mdinfo *info,
>>> info->rwh_policy = RWH_POLICY_PPL;
>>> else
>>> info->rwh_policy = RWH_POLICY_UNKNOWN;
>>> +
>>> + info->journal_clean = info->rwh_policy == RWH_POLICY_PPL;
>>> }
>>> }
>>
>> This part doesn't make sense, first you set info->rwh_policy based on
>> sb->feature_map to RWH_POLICY_PPL or RWH_POLICY_UNKNOWN and then right
>> after you hard set it to RWH_POLICY_PPL.
>>
>> In general I really would prefer not to see any of those double
>> assignments if it can be avoided.
>
> This isn't a double assignment, there is a '==' there. I'm setting
> info->journal_clean to true only if the policy is PPL. I'm not sure how
> this change ended up in this patch, it was supposed to go to 5/7. I must
> have overlooked it.
Argh you're right, code obfuscation at it's finest - if this is meant to
be in 5/7 do you want to respin the two?
In addition why not put the info->journal_clean assignments up together
with the info->rhw_policy assignments? Would make it a lot easier to
read without making my mistake :)
cheers,
Jes
--
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
