From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Neil Brown Subject: Re: Re-size RAID-10 Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:44:58 +1100 Message-ID: <18892.22986.266806.170097@notabene.brown> References: <49CAA763.3050405@amfes.com> <18890.44223.469.924083@notabene.brown> <5d96567b0903260040u7269749y284b66c1f495c48@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: message from Raz on Thursday March 26 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Raz Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Thursday March 26, raziebe@gmail.com wrote: > Neil Hello > I will be grateful for your reply. Currently I am working on raid0 > code reshape. > 1. Will you be working on this functionality in the near future ? I have no plans for raid0 reshape or raid10 reshape. > 2. Should I save the superblocks like mdadm does in the case of 1,4,5,6 ? When the layout changes, you certainly have to update the superblock, yes. > 3. What is the heuristics of strip_zones ? why do we need them ? To make maximum use of available space. > > . non-power 2 raid0 chunk sizes. > 4. Other than segments masks issues, why isn't possible ? can't i fix raid0 > to support 3MB chunks with a segment of 1MB ? There is no intrinsic reason why chunk sizes should be powers of two. When I started working on the code that limit already existed and I have never had any reason to remove it. If you would like to create patches which provide support for non-power-of-two chunk sizes, I will be happy to review them. NeilBrown