> On Oct 22, 7:26am, m...@eterna.com.au (matthew green) wrote: > -- Subject: re: [patch] - add support for >2TB raid devices > > | > | > >+ if (c_label->version == RF_COMPONENT_LABEL_VERSION) > | > >+ c_label->partitionSizeHi = > | > >+ raidPtr->Disks[fcol].partitionSize >> 32; > | > > | > All these tests should really be: > | > > | > + if (c_label->version > RF_COMPONENT_LABEL_VERSION_1) > | > + c_label->partitionSizeHi = > | > + raidPtr->Disks[fcol].partitionSize >> 32; > | > > | > because if you bump the version to version 3, then you will > | > not execute the code for version 2 which already supported it. > | > | i'm not sure this is right. it isn't the current style used for > | the old checks, and who said that verison 3 has the same layout? > > Well, I think that the old check is wrong. Let's say that you have > a bunch of disks with a version 2 label on NetBSD-6. Now you are > booting a NetBSD-7 kernel to upgrade that has code for version 3. > The test will fail; partitionSizeHi will not be set and you are > going to corrupt your filesystem. Is that what we want?
that's not what i'm saying. when version 3 is introduced, all this code will need to be fixed. but your idea depends upon version 3 having the same basic layout, which may not be true, and it also doesn't follow the existing style. .mrg.
