* [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order @ 2011-01-31 8:59 Adam Kwolek 2011-01-31 8:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] imsm: Update metadata for second array Adam Kwolek 2011-01-31 9:18 ` [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order NeilBrown 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Adam Kwolek @ 2011-01-31 8:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: neilb; +Cc: linux-raid, dan.j.williams, ed.ciechanowski, wojciech.neubauer Reshape is started from second array, so it causes imsm incompatibility and problems during second array start. Reshape should be started in arrays metadata order. Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> --- super-intel.c | 9 ++++++++- 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c index f578057..8484df6 100644 --- a/super-intel.c +++ b/super-intel.c @@ -5848,6 +5848,7 @@ static int apply_reshape_container_disks_update(struct imsm_update_reshape *u, int devices_to_reshape = 1; struct imsm_super *mpb = super->anchor; int ret_val = 0; + unsigned int dev_id; dprintf("imsm: imsm_process_update() for update_reshape\n"); @@ -5877,11 +5878,17 @@ static int apply_reshape_container_disks_update(struct imsm_update_reshape *u, " mpb->num_raid_devs = %i\n", mpb->num_raid_devs); /* manage changes in volume */ - for (id = super->devlist ; id; id = id->next) { + for (dev_id = 0; dev_id < mpb->num_raid_devs; dev_id++) { void **sp = *space_list; struct imsm_dev *newdev; struct imsm_map *newmap, *oldmap; + for (id = super->devlist ; id; id = id->next) { + if (id->index == dev_id) + break; + } + if (id == NULL) + break; if (!sp) continue; *space_list = *sp; ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] imsm: Update metadata for second array 2011-01-31 8:59 [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order Adam Kwolek @ 2011-01-31 8:59 ` Adam Kwolek 2011-01-31 9:19 ` NeilBrown 2011-01-31 9:18 ` [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order NeilBrown 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Adam Kwolek @ 2011-01-31 8:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: neilb; +Cc: linux-raid, dan.j.williams, ed.ciechanowski, wojciech.neubauer When second array reshape is about to start external metadata should be updated by mdmon in imsm_set_array_state(). For this purposes imsm_progress_container_reshape() is reused. Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> --- super-intel.c | 6 +++++- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c index 8484df6..0ab4355 100644 --- a/super-intel.c +++ b/super-intel.c @@ -5249,13 +5249,17 @@ static int imsm_set_array_state(struct active_array *a, int consistent) super->updates_pending++; } - /* finalize online capacity expansion/reshape */ + /* manage online capacity expansion/reshape */ if ((a->curr_action != reshape) && (a->prev_action == reshape)) { struct mdinfo *mdi; + /* finalize online capacity expansion/reshape */ for (mdi = a->info.devs; mdi; mdi = mdi->next) imsm_set_disk(a, mdi->disk.raid_disk, mdi->curr_state); + + /* check next volume reshape */ + imsm_progress_container_reshape(super); } return consistent; ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] imsm: Update metadata for second array 2011-01-31 8:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] imsm: Update metadata for second array Adam Kwolek @ 2011-01-31 9:19 ` NeilBrown 2011-01-31 9:28 ` Kwolek, Adam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: NeilBrown @ 2011-01-31 9:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adam Kwolek Cc: linux-raid, dan.j.williams, ed.ciechanowski, wojciech.neubauer On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:59:30 +0100 Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> wrote: > When second array reshape is about to start external metadata should be updated > by mdmon in imsm_set_array_state(). > For this purposes imsm_progress_container_reshape() is reused. > > Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > --- > > super-intel.c | 6 +++++- > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c > index 8484df6..0ab4355 100644 > --- a/super-intel.c > +++ b/super-intel.c > @@ -5249,13 +5249,17 @@ static int imsm_set_array_state(struct active_array *a, int consistent) > super->updates_pending++; > } > > - /* finalize online capacity expansion/reshape */ > + /* manage online capacity expansion/reshape */ > if ((a->curr_action != reshape) && > (a->prev_action == reshape)) { > struct mdinfo *mdi; > > + /* finalize online capacity expansion/reshape */ > for (mdi = a->info.devs; mdi; mdi = mdi->next) > imsm_set_disk(a, mdi->disk.raid_disk, mdi->curr_state); > + > + /* check next volume reshape */ > + imsm_progress_container_reshape(super); > } > > return consistent; You still haven't explained why you need this extra call to imsm_progress_container_reshape. Does the other call never get reached? or does it do the wrong thing? or is it called too early? or too late or ..... NeilBrown ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH 2/2] imsm: Update metadata for second array 2011-01-31 9:19 ` NeilBrown @ 2011-01-31 9:28 ` Kwolek, Adam 2011-01-31 23:23 ` NeilBrown 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Kwolek, Adam @ 2011-01-31 9:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: NeilBrown Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Williams, Dan J, Ciechanowski, Ed, Neubauer, Wojciech > -----Original Message----- > From: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-raid- > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of NeilBrown > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:19 AM > To: Kwolek, Adam > Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Ciechanowski, Ed; > Neubauer, Wojciech > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] imsm: Update metadata for second array > > On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:59:30 +0100 Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > wrote: > > > When second array reshape is about to start external metadata should > be updated > > by mdmon in imsm_set_array_state(). > > For this purposes imsm_progress_container_reshape() is reused. > > > > Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > > --- > > > > super-intel.c | 6 +++++- > > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c > > index 8484df6..0ab4355 100644 > > --- a/super-intel.c > > +++ b/super-intel.c > > @@ -5249,13 +5249,17 @@ static int imsm_set_array_state(struct > active_array *a, int consistent) > > super->updates_pending++; > > } > > > > - /* finalize online capacity expansion/reshape */ > > + /* manage online capacity expansion/reshape */ > > if ((a->curr_action != reshape) && > > (a->prev_action == reshape)) { > > struct mdinfo *mdi; > > > > + /* finalize online capacity expansion/reshape */ > > for (mdi = a->info.devs; mdi; mdi = mdi->next) > > imsm_set_disk(a, mdi->disk.raid_disk, mdi- > >curr_state); > > + > > + /* check next volume reshape */ > > + imsm_progress_container_reshape(super); > > } > > > > return consistent; > > You still haven't explained why you need this extra call to > imsm_progress_container_reshape. > Does the other call never get reached? or does it do the wrong thing? > or is > it called too early? or too late or ..... > > NeilBrown Call to imsm_progress_container_reshape() placed above (super-intel.c:5186), cannot be used as it is called for currently migrated volume only. If we finish migration it will be never be called (guard for migration in progress: super-intel.c:5133) Answer is: It is never called for no migration in progress (not too early and not too late: never). This a reason I've add second call (after finalizing migration) for next array reshape initiation . BR Adam > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" > in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] imsm: Update metadata for second array 2011-01-31 9:28 ` Kwolek, Adam @ 2011-01-31 23:23 ` NeilBrown 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: NeilBrown @ 2011-01-31 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kwolek, Adam Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Williams, Dan J, Ciechanowski, Ed, Neubauer, Wojciech On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:28:54 +0000 "Kwolek, Adam" <adam.kwolek@intel.com> wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-raid- > > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of NeilBrown > > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:19 AM > > To: Kwolek, Adam > > Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Ciechanowski, Ed; > > Neubauer, Wojciech > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] imsm: Update metadata for second array > > > > On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:59:30 +0100 Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > > wrote: > > > > > When second array reshape is about to start external metadata should > > be updated > > > by mdmon in imsm_set_array_state(). > > > For this purposes imsm_progress_container_reshape() is reused. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > > > --- > > > > > > super-intel.c | 6 +++++- > > > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c > > > index 8484df6..0ab4355 100644 > > > --- a/super-intel.c > > > +++ b/super-intel.c > > > @@ -5249,13 +5249,17 @@ static int imsm_set_array_state(struct > > active_array *a, int consistent) > > > super->updates_pending++; > > > } > > > > > > - /* finalize online capacity expansion/reshape */ > > > + /* manage online capacity expansion/reshape */ > > > if ((a->curr_action != reshape) && > > > (a->prev_action == reshape)) { > > > struct mdinfo *mdi; > > > > > > + /* finalize online capacity expansion/reshape */ > > > for (mdi = a->info.devs; mdi; mdi = mdi->next) > > > imsm_set_disk(a, mdi->disk.raid_disk, mdi- > > >curr_state); > > > + > > > + /* check next volume reshape */ > > > + imsm_progress_container_reshape(super); > > > } > > > > > > return consistent; > > > > You still haven't explained why you need this extra call to > > imsm_progress_container_reshape. > > Does the other call never get reached? or does it do the wrong thing? > > or is > > it called too early? or too late or ..... > > > > NeilBrown > > Call to imsm_progress_container_reshape() placed above (super-intel.c:5186), cannot be used as it is called for currently migrated volume only. > If we finish migration it will be never be called (guard for migration in progress: super-intel.c:5133) > > Answer is: It is never called for no migration in progress (not too early and not too late: never). > > This a reason I've add second call (after finalizing migration) for next array reshape initiation . > Thanks. I've applied this for now, but I think something is badly messed up in the handling of migration state - it is terribly convoluted. However I don't have time to untangle it just now so I'll just take you patch and hope it doesn't make anything worse :-) Thanks, NeilBrown ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order 2011-01-31 8:59 [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order Adam Kwolek 2011-01-31 8:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] imsm: Update metadata for second array Adam Kwolek @ 2011-01-31 9:18 ` NeilBrown 2011-01-31 9:30 ` Kwolek, Adam 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: NeilBrown @ 2011-01-31 9:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adam Kwolek Cc: linux-raid, dan.j.williams, ed.ciechanowski, wojciech.neubauer On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:59:22 +0100 Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> wrote: > Reshape is started from second array, so it causes imsm incompatibility > and problems during second array start. > > Reshape should be started in arrays metadata order. > > Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > --- > > super-intel.c | 9 ++++++++- > 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c > index f578057..8484df6 100644 > --- a/super-intel.c > +++ b/super-intel.c > @@ -5848,6 +5848,7 @@ static int apply_reshape_container_disks_update(struct imsm_update_reshape *u, > int devices_to_reshape = 1; > struct imsm_super *mpb = super->anchor; > int ret_val = 0; > + unsigned int dev_id; > > dprintf("imsm: imsm_process_update() for update_reshape\n"); > > @@ -5877,11 +5878,17 @@ static int apply_reshape_container_disks_update(struct imsm_update_reshape *u, > " mpb->num_raid_devs = %i\n", mpb->num_raid_devs); > /* manage changes in volume > */ > - for (id = super->devlist ; id; id = id->next) { > + for (dev_id = 0; dev_id < mpb->num_raid_devs; dev_id++) { > void **sp = *space_list; > struct imsm_dev *newdev; > struct imsm_map *newmap, *oldmap; > > + for (id = super->devlist ; id; id = id->next) { > + if (id->index == dev_id) > + break; > + } Could you replace that loop with a call to get_imsm_dev please? Otherwise, this look good. Thanks, NeilBrown > + if (id == NULL) > + break; > if (!sp) > continue; > *space_list = *sp; ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order 2011-01-31 9:18 ` [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order NeilBrown @ 2011-01-31 9:30 ` Kwolek, Adam 2011-01-31 10:10 ` Kwolek, Adam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Kwolek, Adam @ 2011-01-31 9:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: NeilBrown Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Williams, Dan J, Ciechanowski, Ed, Neubauer, Wojciech > -----Original Message----- > From: NeilBrown [mailto:neilb@suse.de] > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:18 AM > To: Kwolek, Adam > Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Ciechanowski, Ed; > Neubauer, Wojciech > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order > > On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:59:22 +0100 Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > wrote: > > > Reshape is started from second array, so it causes imsm > incompatibility > > and problems during second array start. > > > > Reshape should be started in arrays metadata order. > > > > Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > > --- > > > > super-intel.c | 9 ++++++++- > > 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c > > index f578057..8484df6 100644 > > --- a/super-intel.c > > +++ b/super-intel.c > > @@ -5848,6 +5848,7 @@ static int > apply_reshape_container_disks_update(struct imsm_update_reshape *u, > > int devices_to_reshape = 1; > > struct imsm_super *mpb = super->anchor; > > int ret_val = 0; > > + unsigned int dev_id; > > > > dprintf("imsm: imsm_process_update() for update_reshape\n"); > > > > @@ -5877,11 +5878,17 @@ static int > apply_reshape_container_disks_update(struct imsm_update_reshape *u, > > " mpb->num_raid_devs = %i\n", mpb->num_raid_devs); > > /* manage changes in volume > > */ > > - for (id = super->devlist ; id; id = id->next) { > > + for (dev_id = 0; dev_id < mpb->num_raid_devs; dev_id++) { > > void **sp = *space_list; > > struct imsm_dev *newdev; > > struct imsm_map *newmap, *oldmap; > > > > + for (id = super->devlist ; id; id = id->next) { > > + if (id->index == dev_id) > > + break; > > + } > > Could you replace that loop with a call to get_imsm_dev please? > > Otherwise, this look good. > > Thanks, > NeilBrown In a while ;) BR Adam > > > + if (id == NULL) > > + break; > > if (!sp) > > continue; > > *space_list = *sp; ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order 2011-01-31 9:30 ` Kwolek, Adam @ 2011-01-31 10:10 ` Kwolek, Adam 2011-01-31 23:18 ` NeilBrown 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Kwolek, Adam @ 2011-01-31 10:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kwolek, Adam, NeilBrown Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Williams, Dan J, Ciechanowski, Ed, Neubauer, Wojciech > -----Original Message----- > From: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-raid- > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Kwolek, Adam > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:30 AM > To: NeilBrown > Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Ciechanowski, Ed; > Neubauer, Wojciech > Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: NeilBrown [mailto:neilb@suse.de] > > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:18 AM > > To: Kwolek, Adam > > Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Ciechanowski, Ed; > > Neubauer, Wojciech > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order > > > > On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:59:22 +0100 Adam Kwolek > <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Reshape is started from second array, so it causes imsm > > incompatibility > > > and problems during second array start. > > > > > > Reshape should be started in arrays metadata order. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > > > --- > > > > > > super-intel.c | 9 ++++++++- > > > 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c > > > index f578057..8484df6 100644 > > > --- a/super-intel.c > > > +++ b/super-intel.c > > > @@ -5848,6 +5848,7 @@ static int > > apply_reshape_container_disks_update(struct imsm_update_reshape *u, > > > int devices_to_reshape = 1; > > > struct imsm_super *mpb = super->anchor; > > > int ret_val = 0; > > > + unsigned int dev_id; > > > > > > dprintf("imsm: imsm_process_update() for update_reshape\n"); > > > > > > @@ -5877,11 +5878,17 @@ static int > > apply_reshape_container_disks_update(struct imsm_update_reshape *u, > > > " mpb->num_raid_devs = %i\n", mpb->num_raid_devs); > > > /* manage changes in volume > > > */ > > > - for (id = super->devlist ; id; id = id->next) { > > > + for (dev_id = 0; dev_id < mpb->num_raid_devs; dev_id++) { > > > void **sp = *space_list; > > > struct imsm_dev *newdev; > > > struct imsm_map *newmap, *oldmap; > > > > > > + for (id = super->devlist ; id; id = id->next) { > > > + if (id->index == dev_id) > > > + break; > > > + } > > > > Could you replace that loop with a call to get_imsm_dev please? > > > > Otherwise, this look good. > > > > Thanks, > > NeilBrown > > In a while ;) > BR > Adam I think we should leave this patch as I've proposed. I need to work not on imsm_dev but on intel_dev. intel_dev is required for memory re-linking. If I use there get_imsm_dev() I have to work on 2 pointers set, and keep them in sync. This can introduce more noise in to code. Than 'for' loop you want to remove. Summarizing if I use get_imsm_dev(), I cannot remove this loop (it is required for memory management purposes, few lines below: id->dev = newdev, I need reference to correct intel_dev). BR Adam > > > > > + if (id == NULL) > > > + break; > > > if (!sp) > > > continue; > > > *space_list = *sp; > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" > in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order 2011-01-31 10:10 ` Kwolek, Adam @ 2011-01-31 23:18 ` NeilBrown 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: NeilBrown @ 2011-01-31 23:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kwolek, Adam Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Williams, Dan J, Ciechanowski, Ed, Neubauer, Wojciech On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:10:30 +0000 "Kwolek, Adam" <adam.kwolek@intel.com> wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-raid- > > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Kwolek, Adam > > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:30 AM > > To: NeilBrown > > Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Ciechanowski, Ed; > > Neubauer, Wojciech > > Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: NeilBrown [mailto:neilb@suse.de] > > > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:18 AM > > > To: Kwolek, Adam > > > Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Ciechanowski, Ed; > > > Neubauer, Wojciech > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order > > > > > > On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:59:22 +0100 Adam Kwolek > > <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Reshape is started from second array, so it causes imsm > > > incompatibility > > > > and problems during second array start. > > > > > > > > Reshape should be started in arrays metadata order. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Adam Kwolek <adam.kwolek@intel.com> > > > > --- > > > > > > > > super-intel.c | 9 ++++++++- > > > > 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c > > > > index f578057..8484df6 100644 > > > > --- a/super-intel.c > > > > +++ b/super-intel.c > > > > @@ -5848,6 +5848,7 @@ static int > > > apply_reshape_container_disks_update(struct imsm_update_reshape *u, > > > > int devices_to_reshape = 1; > > > > struct imsm_super *mpb = super->anchor; > > > > int ret_val = 0; > > > > + unsigned int dev_id; > > > > > > > > dprintf("imsm: imsm_process_update() for update_reshape\n"); > > > > > > > > @@ -5877,11 +5878,17 @@ static int > > > apply_reshape_container_disks_update(struct imsm_update_reshape *u, > > > > " mpb->num_raid_devs = %i\n", mpb->num_raid_devs); > > > > /* manage changes in volume > > > > */ > > > > - for (id = super->devlist ; id; id = id->next) { > > > > + for (dev_id = 0; dev_id < mpb->num_raid_devs; dev_id++) { > > > > void **sp = *space_list; > > > > struct imsm_dev *newdev; > > > > struct imsm_map *newmap, *oldmap; > > > > > > > > + for (id = super->devlist ; id; id = id->next) { > > > > + if (id->index == dev_id) > > > > + break; > > > > + } > > > > > > Could you replace that loop with a call to get_imsm_dev please? > > > > > > Otherwise, this look good. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > NeilBrown > > > > In a while ;) > > BR > > Adam > > I think we should leave this patch as I've proposed. I need to work not on imsm_dev but on intel_dev. > intel_dev is required for memory re-linking. > If I use there get_imsm_dev() I have to work on 2 pointers set, and keep them in sync. This can introduce more noise in to code. > Than 'for' loop you want to remove. > > Summarizing if I use get_imsm_dev(), I cannot remove this loop (it is required for memory management purposes, > few lines below: id->dev = newdev, I need reference to correct intel_dev). > Fair enough - I've applied the original version (not the v2). Thanks, NeilBrown ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-01-31 23:23 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2011-01-31 8:59 [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order Adam Kwolek 2011-01-31 8:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] imsm: Update metadata for second array Adam Kwolek 2011-01-31 9:19 ` NeilBrown 2011-01-31 9:28 ` Kwolek, Adam 2011-01-31 23:23 ` NeilBrown 2011-01-31 9:18 ` [PATCH 1/2] imsm:FIX: change arrays reshape order NeilBrown 2011-01-31 9:30 ` Kwolek, Adam 2011-01-31 10:10 ` Kwolek, Adam 2011-01-31 23:18 ` NeilBrown
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).