Comment 51 for bug 557429

> >> If I plug in one disk and make some changes, then unplug it,
> >> plug in the other disk, and make some changes to it,
> >
> > What would be your use-case?
>
> I don't understand this question. The use case is described in the
> text you replied to.

Please explain why someone would do that, a raid does not get segmented
and charged with conflicting changes by itself. Even if an intermittent
and alternating failure causes it, it should get reported independent
from if metadata is altered.

> > In most cases the next thing one would probably want
> > after conflicting changes are present in a system is to sync, in an
> > easy way. (Not to keep rebooting or reattaching much. Reattaching is
> > just a simple way to determine the order.)
> >
> > As your case does not sound like a hot-plug use-case. Probably
> > handle that with --remove?
>
> Handle what?

Manually removing should make sure always only one and the same part
gets assembled. It sounds like you want to hot-plug the parts in an
arbitrary oder and not have the array assembly be determined by this.

> The [auto-]removing does not break anything.

Please stop ignoring that auto-remove breaks hot-plugging. By this
mdadm --incremental would limit the usefullness of itself.