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 D1C61CDB47E for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2023 13:44:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231942AbjJMNoM (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Oct 2023 09:44:12 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38402 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230160AbjJMNoL (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Oct 2023 09:44:11 -0400 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.9]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A000795 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2023 06:44:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1697204651; x=1728740651; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MEZFwNt464iDZi7EjCH/0+Px22SG0MKzTVQ1f/LzxIQ=; b=ax4hOPt1mh30pI10PAy7C8G3fAqDTIaRw7ymy8podAj1mb0RX7dX0CZ9 I6H3HSwGKY43t4ZNC78EMEWUIwK0EGOmIpkYOTQ2QDLAc4uKlfGMB/xax 03AGVC3R+Vs8kjdKtdnndgCdM1fP2IUB9sA1fVAi6iEw2Uho6KNJuGfDw +VnORNnZfdkS3aB/8wEm74p0drNdczkLGVRshNLsRU5oeXBYyCWfELzI9 7+YGH2zzVIl/tlrPdmIJDzgKB64vrvzw/yUjEBOrGr9E0yMCe3TW4Sacl s1lI8fJg5yVuZUfCcL/yd2rIn8FasLA4bIJH+PiWwySqwAsxMPdySjnJr Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10862"; a="3785808" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.03,222,1694761200"; d="scan'208";a="3785808" Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orvoesa101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Oct 2023 06:44:10 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10862"; a="845479252" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.03,222,1694761200"; d="scan'208";a="845479252" Received: from mtkaczyk-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.249.156.199]) by fmsmga003-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Oct 2023 06:44:08 -0700 Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 15:44:02 +0200 From: Mariusz Tkaczyk To: Xiao Ni Cc: jes@trained-monkey.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, colyli@suse.de, neilb@suse.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mdadm/super1: Add MD_FEATURE_RAID0_LAYOUT if sb->layout is set Message-ID: <20231013154402.00003976@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20231011130522.78994-1-xni@redhat.com> <20231013113034.0000298a@linux.intel.com> <20231013135935.00005679@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.0 (GTK 3.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32) 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 On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 20:12:38 +0800 Xiao Ni wrote: > > > > So, it forces the calculations made by Neil back but I think that we can > > > > simply compare dev_size and data_offset between members. > > > > > > We don't need to consider the compatibility anymore in future? > > > > > Not sure if I get your question correctly. This property is supported now so > > why we should? It is already there so we are safe to set it. > > I asked because you said we can remove the check in future. So I don't > know why we don't need the check in future. The check here should be > the kernel version check, right? We are not supporting old kernels forever. At some point of time, we would decide that kernels older than 5.5 are no longer a valid case and then we will free to remove verification. If we are not supporting something older than the version where it was added, we can assume that MD_RAID0_LAYOUT is always available and we don't need to care anymore, right? Here a recent example: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/mdadm/mdadm.git/commit/?id=f8d2c4286a Thanks, Mariusz