From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Neil Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/2] md: personality pushdown patches -- intro Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 08:19:41 +1000 Message-ID: <18977.45309.243141.219288@notabene.brown> References: <1243603122-11116-1-git-send-email-maan@systemlinux.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: message from Andre Noll on Friday May 29 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andre Noll Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Friday May 29, maan@systemlinux.org wrote: > Here are the first two patches for pushing down raid level dependent > code from md.c to the corresponding personalities. > > The first patch is trivial as it moves only a printk() to the > personalities. The second patch removes knowledge about bitmaps > from md.c. Thanks Andre. This first is good and is now in my for-next branch. The second is heading in the right direction. However md_bitmap_present is as much of a layering violation in its own way as the previous code was - diving in to the metatype_type specific data. You will notice in bitmap_create that an array has a bitmap if and only if (mddev->bitmap_file || mddev->bitmap_offset). So that is the test which should be used in md_bitmap_present. Also the function name "md_bitmap_present" give no hint that it will report an error - it reads like a simple test. Maybe "md_check_no_bitmap" to indicate what the function is expecting to find? Thanks, NeilBrown > > If the general approach used by the second patch is agreed with, I > will follow up with patches that deal with data integrity registration > and multipath handling which are the remaining two issues where md.c > does what should be handled in personality code. > > Thanks > Andre > -- > 1.5.4.3