Re: [PATCH] FIX: Cannot continue reshape if incremental assembly is used

[NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1433 bytes --]

On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 21:42:28 -0700 "Williams, Dan J"
<dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:

> On Sep 7, 2011 6:26 PM, "NeilBrown" <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 18:11:12 -0700 "Williams, Dan J"
> > <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 6:21 AM, Dorau, Lukasz <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
> wrote:
> > > Hmm, this might just be cribbed from the initial DDF implementation,
> > > should be straightforward to reuse the count we use for
> > > container_enough, but I'm not seeing where Incremental uses
> > > working_disks for external arrays...
> >
> > Assemble.c: assemble_container_content()
> > ....
> >        if (runstop > 0 ||
> >                 (working + preexist + expansion) >=
> >                        content->array.working_disks) {
> > ....
> >
> 
> ...so now i'd like to kill ->container_enough, because similar to the
> MD_SB_INVALID suggestion it's probably better to let ->container_content
> flag the true state rather than some sideband "don't call
> ->container_content yet" mechanism.

(catching up on some old mail).

I would be happy with that.

I don't exactly object to ->container_enough as it is conceivable that the
container knows something about the whole that you cannot deduce from the
member arrays.
But we definitely to want working_disks to be accurate so that we don't just
trust container_enough.

Thanks,
NeilBrown

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]