Re: [PATCH] - filesystem corruption on soft RAID5 in 2.4.0+ (fwd)

["Martin K. Petersen" <mkp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

[MD vs. 512 byte sectors]

>> Looks like a good call to me.  It definately would have problems
>> with a 512 byte block size.
>>
>> The resync code has always been done in multiples of 1K, and as I
>> wasn't really sure why, I didn't change it.  But now I am a lot
>> more familiar with all the code and I am quite confident that
>> changing it to work in 512 byte units would be fine.  

Looks good here.  I'm beating on it right now and will send out a
patch later today.


>> Probably make various bits of code cleaner too.  

Yep.  There are like a gazillion places where the code converts
between 1K blocks and sectors.

-- 
Martin K. Petersen, Principal Linux Consultant, Linuxcare, Inc.
mkp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, http://www.linuxcare.com/
Linuxcare. Moving Forward.