On 6/17/22 13:09, Nigel Croxon wrote:
> On 6/14/22 10:11 AM, Nigel Croxon wrote:
>> On 4/18/22 1:44 PM, Nigel Croxon wrote:
>>> This reverts commit 546047688e1c64638f462147c755b58119cabdc8.
>>>
>>> The change from commit mdadm: fix coredump of mdadm
>>> --monitor -r broke the printing of the return message when
>>> passing -r to mdadm --manage, the removal of a device from
>>> an array.
>>>
>>> If the current code reverts this commit, both issues are
>>> still fixed.
>>>
>>> The original problem reported that the fix tried to address
>>> was: The --monitor -r option requires a parameter,
>>> otherwise a null pointer will be manipulated when
>>> converting to integer data, and a core dump will appear.
>>>
>>> The original problem was really fixed with:
>>> 60815698c0a Refactor parse_num and use it to parse optarg.
>>> Which added a check for NULL in 'optarg' before moving it
>>> to the 'increments' variable.
>>>
>>> New issue: When trying to remove a device using the short
>>> argument -r, instead of the long argument --remove, the
>>> output is empty. The problem started when commit
>>> 546047688e1c was added.
>>>
>>> Steps to Reproduce:
>>> 1. create/assemble /dev/md0 device
>>> 2. mdadm --manage /dev/md0 -r /dev/vdxx
>>>
>>> Actual results:
>>> Nothing, empty output, nothing happens, the device is still
>>> connected to the array.
>>>
>>> The output should have stated "mdadm: hot remove failed
>>> for /dev/vdxx: Device or resource busy", if the device was
>>> still active. Or it should remove the device and print
>>> a message:
>>>
>>> mdadm: set /dev/vdd faulty in /dev/md0
>>> mdadm: hot removed /dev/vdd from /dev/md0
>>>
>>> The following commit should be reverted as it breaks
>>> mdadm --manage -r.
>>>
>>> commit 546047688e1c64638f462147c755b58119cabdc8
>>> Author: Wu Guanghao <wuguanghao3@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Date: Mon Aug 16 15:24:51 2021 +0800
>>> mdadm: fix coredump of mdadm --monitor -r
>>>
>>> -Nigel
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nigel Croxon <ncroxon@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> ReadMe.c | 6 +++---
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/ReadMe.c b/ReadMe.c
>>> index 8f873c48..bec1be9a 100644
>>> --- a/ReadMe.c
>>> +++ b/ReadMe.c
>>> @@ -81,11 +81,11 @@ char Version[] = "mdadm - v" VERSION " - "
>>> VERS_DATE EXTRAVERSION "\n";
>>> * found, it is started.
>>> */
>>> -char
>>> short_options[]="-ABCDEFGIQhVXYWZ:vqbc:i:l:p:m:r:n:x:u:c:d:z:U:N:safRSow1tye:k";
>>>
>>> +char
>>> short_options[]="-ABCDEFGIQhVXYWZ:vqbc:i:l:p:m:n:x:u:c:d:z:U:N:sarfRSow1tye:k:";
>>>
>>> char short_bitmap_options[]=
>>> -
>>> "-ABCDEFGIQhVXYWZ:vqb:c:i:l:p:m:r:n:x:u:c:d:z:U:N:sarfRSow1tye:k:";
>>> +
>>> "-ABCDEFGIQhVXYWZ:vqb:c:i:l:p:m:n:x:u:c:d:z:U:N:sarfRSow1tye:k:";
>>> char short_bitmap_auto_options[]=
>>> -
>>> "-ABCDEFGIQhVXYWZ:vqb:c:i:l:p:m:r:n:x:u:c:d:z:U:N:sa:rfRSow1tye:k:";
>>> +
>>> "-ABCDEFGIQhVXYWZ:vqb:c:i:l:p:m:n:x:u:c:d:z:U:N:sa:rfRSow1tye:k:";
>>> struct option long_options[] = {
>>> {"manage", 0, 0, ManageOpt},
>>
>> Jes, That is the status of this patch?
>>
>> Thanks, Nigel
>
>
> Jes, Is there an issue with reverting this patch?
The fact that I am swamped with my regular work and it hadn't made it
into patchworks. It's applied now.
Jes
