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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 408E8C433E6 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 19:00:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25E6920719 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 19:00:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728117AbgHaTAk (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2020 15:00:40 -0400 Received: from icebox.esperi.org.uk ([81.187.191.129]:52144 "EHLO mail.esperi.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727993AbgHaTAk (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2020 15:00:40 -0400 Received: from loom (nix@sidle.srvr.nix [192.168.14.8]) by mail.esperi.org.uk (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 07VJ0ZS3006896; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 20:00:35 +0100 From: Nix To: Zhong Lidong Cc: Ian Pilcher , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Detail: don't display the raid level when it's inactive References: <20200826151658.3493-1-lidong.zhong@suse.com> <0468dc70-7309-44b1-f094-67b617bf4c98@suse.com> Emacs: well, why *shouldn't* you pay property taxes on your editor? Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 20:00:35 +0100 In-Reply-To: <0468dc70-7309-44b1-f094-67b617bf4c98@suse.com> (Zhong Lidong's message of "Mon, 31 Aug 2020 09:28:09 +0800") Message-ID: <87wo1emyi4.fsf@esperi.org.uk> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-DCC--Metrics: loom 1481; Body=3 Fuz1=3 Fuz2=3 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org On 31 Aug 2020, Zhong Lidong told this: > On 8/29/20 12:38 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote: >> On 8/26/20 10:16 AM, Lidong Zhong wrote: >>> ... >>> So the misleading "raid0" is shown in this testcase. I think maybe >>> the "Raid Level" item shouldn't be displayed any more for the inactive >>> array. >> >> As a system administrator, I'd much rather see "unknown" (or something >> similar), rather than simply omitting the information. >> > Thanks for the suggestion. > Yeah, just removing the Raid Level info is not the best option. I also > considered to show it as "inactive Raid1" in such case. If it would be a raid1 when activated, it is still a raid1 when inactive: the data on disk doesn't suddenly become not a raid array simply because the kernel isn't able to access it right now. This is valuable information to expose to the sysadmin and should not be concealed (and *certainly* not described as a raid level it actually isn't). I think it should say as much (if the system knows at this stage, which if there is a device node, it presumably does).