From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luca Berra Subject: Re: LVM on dmraid breakage Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 08:50:12 +0200 Message-ID: <20070802065012.GA28687@percy.comedia.it> References: <46B0EAEF.6090305@cfl.rr.com> Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46B0EAEF.6090305@cfl.rr.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-lvm-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-bounces@redhat.com To: device-mapper development , "ATARAID (eg, Promise Fasttrak, Highpoint 370) related discussions" Cc: linux-lvm@redhat.com List-Id: dm-devel.ids On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 04:19:59PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote: >I am investigating a bug report involving the combination of lvm and >dmraid, and it seems to me that the problem is that lvm is detecting the >underlying partition on the primary disk and accessing it directly >rather than going through the raid device made by dmraid. I think that >the problem is there is no facility for dmraid to "claim" the physical >disk so that lvm does not look at it, and also to have lvm scan the raid >device for physical volumes. > >Does anyone have any thoughts on how this might be accomplished? Two things come to mind 1) dmraid should use ioctl BLKPG_DEL_PARTITION, to clean up any eventual partition table on component devices 2) lvm tool filter could be modified to check if a device has been already claimed by device-mapper. something along the lines of: ioctl DM_LIST_DEVICES while (...) ioctl DM_TABLE_DEPS the above would probably require a cache. i believe that manual use of partx or lvm filters is sub-optimal L. -- Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \ _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/ From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 08:50:12 +0200 From: Luca Berra Message-ID: <20070802065012.GA28687@percy.comedia.it> References: <46B0EAEF.6090305@cfl.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46B0EAEF.6090305@cfl.rr.com> Subject: [linux-lvm] Re: LVM on dmraid breakage Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: device-mapper development , "ATARAID (eg, Promise Fasttrak, Highpoint 370) related discussions" Cc: linux-lvm@redhat.com On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 04:19:59PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote: >I am investigating a bug report involving the combination of lvm and >dmraid, and it seems to me that the problem is that lvm is detecting the >underlying partition on the primary disk and accessing it directly >rather than going through the raid device made by dmraid. I think that >the problem is there is no facility for dmraid to "claim" the physical >disk so that lvm does not look at it, and also to have lvm scan the raid >device for physical volumes. > >Does anyone have any thoughts on how this might be accomplished? Two things come to mind 1) dmraid should use ioctl BLKPG_DEL_PARTITION, to clean up any eventual partition table on component devices 2) lvm tool filter could be modified to check if a device has been already claimed by device-mapper. something along the lines of: ioctl DM_LIST_DEVICES while (...) ioctl DM_TABLE_DEPS the above would probably require a cache. i believe that manual use of partx or lvm filters is sub-optimal L. -- Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \