From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
Cc: "Labun, Marcin" <Marcin.Labun@intel.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
Linux RAID Mailing List <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>,
"Ciechanowski, Ed" <ed.ciechanowski@intel.com>,
"Hawrylewicz Czarnowski,
Przemyslaw" <przemyslaw.hawrylewicz.czarnowski@intel.com>
Subject: Re: More Hot Unplug/Plug work
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:13:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BD8A50F.1030904@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BD8A336.7080309@redhat.com>
Doug Ledford wrote:
> On 04/28/2010 02:34 PM, Labun, Marcin wrote:
>> Should an array be split (not assembled) if a domain paths are dividing array into two separate DOMAIN?
>
> I don't think so. Amongst other things, this would make it possible to
> render a machine unbootable if you had a type in a domain path. I think
> I would prefer to allow established arrays to assemble regardless of
> domain path entries.
This is what I was calling the 'enforce=' policy in previous mails.
Whether to block, warn, or ignore arrays that span a domain. I can see
someone wanting to have something like enforce=platform to make sure we
Linux tries to assemble an array that the option-rom can't put together.
>>> I'm happy to rework the code to support it if there's a valid use
>>> case, but so far my design goal has been to have a path only appear in
>>> one domain, and to then perform the appropriate action based upon that
>>> domain.
>> What is then the purpose of metadata keyword?
>
> Mainly as a hint that a given domain uses a specific type of metadata.
Yeah, to protect against cases where a stale disk is plugged into an
unexpected port.
--
Dan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-28 21:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-27 16:45 More Hot Unplug/Plug work Doug Ledford
2010-04-27 19:41 ` Christian Gatzemeier
2010-04-28 16:08 ` Labun, Marcin
2010-04-28 17:47 ` Doug Ledford
2010-04-28 18:34 ` Labun, Marcin
2010-04-28 21:05 ` Doug Ledford
2010-04-28 21:13 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2010-04-30 13:38 ` Doug Ledford
2010-04-29 1:01 ` Neil Brown
2010-04-29 1:19 ` Dan Williams
2010-04-29 2:37 ` Neil Brown
2010-04-29 18:22 ` Labun, Marcin
2010-04-29 21:55 ` Dan Williams
2010-05-03 5:58 ` Neil Brown
2010-05-08 1:06 ` Dan Williams
2010-04-30 16:13 ` Doug Ledford
2010-04-30 11:14 ` John Robinson
2010-04-30 15:52 ` Doug Ledford
2010-04-28 20:59 ` Luca Berra
2010-04-28 21:16 ` Doug Ledford
2010-04-29 20:32 ` Dan Williams
2010-04-29 21:22 ` Dan Williams
2010-04-30 16:26 ` Doug Ledford
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4BD8A50F.1030904@intel.com \
--to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=Marcin.Labun@intel.com \
--cc=dledford@redhat.com \
--cc=ed.ciechanowski@intel.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=przemyslaw.hawrylewicz.czarnowski@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).