From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A0FCC433F5 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 08:02:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233206AbhLQICp (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Dec 2021 03:02:45 -0500 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:22902 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233168AbhLQICp (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Dec 2021 03:02:45 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10200"; a="226993277" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,213,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="226993277" Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Dec 2021 00:02:44 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,213,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="506676892" Received: from mtkaczyk-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.213.21.206]) by orsmga007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Dec 2021 00:02:43 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 09:02:38 +0100 From: Mariusz Tkaczyk To: Song Liu Cc: linux-raid Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Use MD_BROKEN for redundant arrays Message-ID: <20211217090238.00000166@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20211216145222.15370-1-mariusz.tkaczyk@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org Hi Song, On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:52:23 -0800 Song Liu wrote: > > Mariusz Tkaczyk (3): > > raid0, linear, md: add error_handlers for raid0 and linear > > md: Set MD_BROKEN for RAID1 and RAID10 > > raid5: introduce MD_BROKEN > > The set looks good to me. The only concern is that we changed some > messages. While dmesg is not a stable API, I believe there are people > grep on it to detect errors. > Therefore, please try to keep these messages same as before (as much > as possible). Will do. After sending it, I realized that my approach is not correct when mddev->fail_last_dev is on. MD_BRKOEN should be set even if we agree to remove the "last" drive. I will fix it too. Thanks, Mariusz