Anand Jain posted on Mon, 02 May 2016 12:12:31 +0800 as excerpted:
> On 04/30/2016 12:37 AM, David Sterba wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:06:18AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
>>> From the comments that commit[1] deleted
>>>
>>> - /*
>>> - * we add in the count of missing devices because we want
On 04/30/2016 12:37 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:06:18AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
From the comments that commit[1] deleted
- /*
- * we add in the count of missing devices because we want
- * to make sure that any RAID levels on a degraded FS
- * continue to be honored.
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:06:18AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> From the comments that commit[1] deleted
>
> - /*
> - * we add in the count of missing devices because we want
> - * to make sure that any RAID levels on a degraded FS
> - * continue to be honored.
> - *
>
> appear to me that automatic
>From the comments that commit[1] deleted
- /*
- * we add in the count of missing devices because we want
- * to make sure that any RAID levels on a degraded FS
- * continue to be honored.
- *
appear to me that automatic reduced-chunk-allocation
when RAID1 is degraded wasn't in the original desig
