From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mwilck@arcor.de Subject: [PATCH 02/27] DDF: check_secondary: fix treatment of missing BVDs Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 22:27:42 +0200 Message-ID: <1372883287-8859-3-git-send-email-mwilck@arcor.de> References: <1372883287-8859-1-git-send-email-mwilck@arcor.de> Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1372883287-8859-1-git-send-email-mwilck@arcor.de> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: neilb@suse.de, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org Cc: mwilck@arcor.de List-Id: linux-raid.ids Unused BVDs should just be skipped instead of bailing out. Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck --- super-ddf.c | 6 ++---- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/super-ddf.c b/super-ddf.c index 91feb87..c445df2 100644 --- a/super-ddf.c +++ b/super-ddf.c @@ -3222,10 +3222,8 @@ static int check_secondary(const struct vcl *vc) __set_sec_seen(conf->sec_elmnt_seq); for (i = 0; i < conf->sec_elmnt_count-1; i++) { const struct vd_config *bvd = vc->other_bvds[i]; - if (bvd == NULL) { - pr_err("BVD %d is missing\n", i+1); - return -1; - } + if (bvd == NULL) + continue; if (bvd->srl != conf->srl) { pr_err("Inconsistent secondary RAID level across BVDs\n"); return -1; -- 1.7.1