On 10/10/17 21:09, Jes Sorensen wrote: >> Both operations would share the current code, just apply a different >> sanity check before proceeding. > > "grow" in mdadmlish translates to reshape/resize in English. Starting to > introduce new keywords for this really makes no sense and just cause > confusion, so I am not going to support that. But saying "grow" when the result is a shrink also causes confusion. Would you accept changing "grow" to "resize"? But personally I think adding a new keyword is sensible. Firstly, in normal use no-one is ever going to want to shrink an array, so this is rarely going to be used. And secondly, if you use "grow" to grow an array, it's a "safe" operation (unless something goes wrong). If you use "grow" to *shrink* an array, as Eli found out, it's very dangerous. I think abusing the English language is far more dangerous than adding a new keyword. No disrespect to them, but you forget your average sysadmin is, well, average. Handing them a loaded foot-gun with no safety-catch is *not* a good idea. (And even a good sysadmin will spend little time with mdadm. Even if they know this now, there's a good chance they'll forget before they need it again, and it becomes a land-mine waiting to go off ...) One only has to look at the "hung grow" thread to see what the lack of safety-catches can do - if anybody wants another little project, might it be an idea to make a load of operations (like resize for example) block on a degraded array? Cheers, Wol -- 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
