> 2023年10月13日 21:44，Mariusz Tkaczyk <mariusz.tkaczyk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 写道： > > On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 20:12:38 +0800 > Xiao Ni <xni@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> So, it forces the calculations made by Neil back but I think that we can >>>>> simply compare dev_size and data_offset between members. >>>> >>>> We don't need to consider the compatibility anymore in future? >>>> >>> Not sure if I get your question correctly. This property is supported now so >>> why we should? It is already there so we are safe to set it. >> >> I asked because you said we can remove the check in future. So I don't >> know why we don't need the check in future. The check here should be >> the kernel version check, right? > > > We are not supporting old kernels forever. At some point of time, we would > decide that kernels older than 5.5 are no longer a valid case and then we will > free to remove verification. If we are not supporting something older than the > version where it was added, we can assume that MD_RAID0_LAYOUT is always > available and we don't need to care anymore, right? > > Here a recent example: > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/mdadm/mdadm.git/commit/?id=f8d2c4286a Just FYI, we still support Linux v4.12 based kernel for SLES12-SP5. Coly Li
