<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Apr 18, 2012, at 9:05 AM, Brassow Jonathan wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><br>5-of-5: changing the check to 'saved_raid_disk >= 0' would be fine, but I think I should initialize 'saved_raid_disk' to -1 in dm-raid.c then normally. Right now, an nominal initial value is not set - meaning it is '0'. (When a device comes back from a failure, 'saved_raid_disk' is assigned its old position.)<br></span></blockquote></div><br><div>... that's not quite right. I do call 'md_rdev_init' which sets 'saved_raid_disk' to -1. Then, if the device has returned after a disappearance, I set 'saved_raid_disk' to it's old position. Therefore, 'saved_raid_disk >= 0' would be fine and wouldn't require me to set -1 in dm-raid.c.</div><div><br></div><div> brassow</div><div><br></div></body></html>