On Wed, 20 May 2026 18:11:09 +0930 Qu Wenruo <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > 在 2026/5/18 14:42, Christoph Hellwig 写道: > > On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 12:59:34PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >> I don't think this is a good idea. Error out; it is the btrfs maintainers' > >> job to ensure user data isn't lost. > >> > >> The RAID-6 code has *never* supported only 3 units, and if it ever worked > >> for *any* of the implementations it was purely by accident. Speaking as > >> the original author I should know; this was deliberate as in some cases > >> the degenerate case (3) would have required extra trays in the code to no > >> user benefit. > >> > >> I would not be surprised if the kernel crashed or corrupted the page cache > >> in that case. > > > > It does, that's why I wanted to exclude it. Anyway, for the about to be > > resent version I'll drop this btrfs patch over the stated objection and > > will otherwise not change anything. This means the (IMHO hypothetical) > > users of this configuration will get a WARN_ON_ONCE triggered, but > > otherwise keep working (or rather not working) as before. > > > > For the btrfs part, I believe I can get the current 2-disk-raid5 and > 3-disk-raid6 to fallback to raid1 inside btrfs. > > I hope the btrfs part can be finished and reach the next merge window, > but I'm not 100% sure. > > What is the planned cycle to merge this raid5/6 cleanup? At present it's on track for the 7.2-rc1 merge window. Does that suit?
