Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:49:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:49:51 -0500 Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.102]:58057 "EHLO e2.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:49:44 -0500 Importance: Normal Sensitivity: Subject: Re: RFC - new raid superblock layout for md driver To: Neil Brown Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.4 June 8, 2000 Message-ID: From: "Steve Pratt" Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 09:55:55 -0600 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01ML072/01/M/IBM(Release 5.0.11 +SPRs MIAS5EXFG4, MIAS5AUFPV and DHAG4Y6R7W, MATTEST |November 8th, 2002) at 11/20/2002 10:56:38 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1856 Lines: 72 Neil Brown wrote; >I would like to propose a new layout, and to receive comment on it.. >/* constant this-device information - 64 bytes */ >u64 address of superblock in device >u32 number of this device in array /* constant over reconfigurations */ Does this mean that there can be holes in the numbering for disks that die and are replaced? >u32 device_uuid[4] >u32 pad3[9] >/* array state information - 64 bytes */ >u32 utime >u32 state /* clean, resync-in-progress */ >u32 sb_csum These next 2 fields are not 64 bit aligned. Either rearrange or add padding. >u64 events >u64 resync-position /* flag in state if this is valid) >u32 number of devices >u32 pad2[8] >Other features: >A feature map instead of a minor version number. Good. >64 bit component device size field. Size in sectors not blocks please. >no "minor" field but a textual "name" field instead. Ok, I assume that there will be some way for userspace to query the minor which gets dynamically assigned when the array is started. >address of superblock in superblock to avoid misidentifying superblock. e.g. is it >in a partition or a whole device. Really needed this. >The interpretation of the 'name' field would be up to the user-space >tools and the system administrator. Yes, so let's leave this out of this discussion. EVMS 2.0 with full user-space discovery should be able to support the new superblock format without any problems. We would like to work together on this new format. Keep up the good work, Steve - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/