Messages in this thread | | | From | Kyle Moffett <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/3] sysfs representation of stacked devices (dm/md) | Date | Sat, 18 Feb 2006 01:06:01 -0500 |
| |
On Feb 17, 2006, at 14:42, Alasdair G Kergon wrote: > On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 01:00:17PM -0500, Jun'ichi Nomura wrote: >> Though md0, dm-0, dm-1 and sd[a-d] contain same LVM2 meta data, >> LVM2 should pick up md0 as PV, not dm-0, dm-1 and sdXs. mdadm >> should build md0 from dm-0 and dm-1, not from sdXs. Similar things >> will happen on 'mount' and 'fsck' if we use file system labels >> instead of LVM2. > > I can't speak for the 'mount' code base, but I don't think it'll > make any significant difference to LVM2 - we'd still have to do all > the same device scanning as we do now because we have to be aware > of md devices defined in on-disk metadata regardless of whether or > not the kernel knows about them at the time the command is run.
Aha! This is a very valid reason why we should export partition types from the kernel to userspace: Partitions/devices that appear to have 2 different filesystems/formats. The _kernel_ cannot reliably tell which to use. On the other hand, a properly configured _userspace_ initramfs could use configured partition-type information, a small config file, and a user-configurable detection algorithm to figure out that the device is _actually_ the first segment of an ext3-on-LVM-on-RAID1, instead of a raw ext3, and mount it appropriately. Now, this requires that the admin correctly specify the partition types, but that seems a bit more reliable than depending on the probe-order to get things right.
Cheers, Kyle Moffett
-- Unix was not designed to stop people from doing stupid things, because that would also stop them from doing clever things. -- Doug Gwyn
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |