From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shaohua Li Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] md/raid5: Add change_consistency_policy to raid4 and raid6 Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 10:08:59 -0700 Message-ID: <20170324170859.fkbyn5ruqy7xyf5q@kernel.org> References: <20170316221409.3283344-1-songliubraving@fb.com> <20170324144535.chk4jgktism4mvlu@kernel.org> <8acaaf1e-7e67-2c9b-fc1f-7c9237131260@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8acaaf1e-7e67-2c9b-fc1f-7c9237131260@intel.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Artur Paszkiewicz Cc: Song Liu , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, shli@fb.com, neilb@suse.com, kernel-team@fb.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, hch@infradead.org, jes.sorensen@gmail.com List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 04:17:16PM +0100, Artur Paszkiewicz wrote: > On 03/24/2017 03:45 PM, Shaohua Li wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:14:08PM -0700, Song Liu wrote: > >> Add change_consistency_policy to raid6_personality and > >> raid4_personality. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Song Liu > >> --- > >> drivers/md/raid5.c | 2 ++ > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c > >> index 88cc898..7a6e7ea 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/md/raid5.c > >> +++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c > >> @@ -8408,6 +8408,7 @@ static struct md_personality raid6_personality = > >> .quiesce = raid5_quiesce, > >> .takeover = raid6_takeover, > >> .congested = raid5_congested, > >> + .change_consistency_policy = raid5_change_consistency_policy, > >> }; > >> static struct md_personality raid5_personality = > >> { > >> @@ -8456,6 +8457,7 @@ static struct md_personality raid4_personality = > >> .quiesce = raid5_quiesce, > >> .takeover = raid4_takeover, > >> .congested = raid5_congested, > >> + .change_consistency_policy = raid5_change_consistency_policy, > >> }; > > sorry for the late reply. > > > > the change_consistency_policy is only for raid5 for a reason, ppl is only for > > raid5. I think you need to filter out raid 4/6 in > > raid5_change_consistency_policy for ppl. > > Not necessarily. There is a check in ppl_init_log() that won't allow > starting ppl if it's not raid5. But it certainly wouldn't hurt. It will still set the PPL flag for raid4/6. Checking raid 5 in change_consistency_policy is clearer anyway. Thanks, Shaohua