From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 03:53:54 +0000 (+1000)
Subject: Detail/raid10: don't report 'set' names for 'far' and 'offset' raid10.
X-Git-Tag: mdadm-3.3-rc1~211
X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=787e234ddcb08029df08a1de0a8088b4d25677c3;p=thirdparty%2Fmdadm.git

Detail/raid10: don't report 'set' names for 'far' and 'offset' raid10.

The 'set' concept is only meaningful for 'near' arrays, so only
use it there.

Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
---

diff --git a/Detail.c b/Detail.c
index f3a1e3e1..97712b06 100644
--- a/Detail.c
+++ b/Detail.c
@@ -547,7 +547,7 @@ This is pretty boring
 					int nc = array.layout & 0xff;
 					int fc = (array.layout >> 8) & 0xff;
 					int copies = nc*fc;
-					if (array.raid_disks % copies == 0 && copies <= 26) {
+					if (fc == 1 && array.raid_disks % copies == 0 && copies <= 26) {
 						/* We can divide the devices into 'sets' */
 						int set = disk.raid_disk % copies;
 						printf(" set-%c", set + 'A');