From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Snitzer Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 09:55:15 -0500 Subject: Suppress locking initialisation failure messages when --ignorelockingfailure is used In-Reply-To: <4B702169.2000405@redhat.com> References: <4B700EDC.7020505@redhat.com> <4B701284.1030606@redhat.com> <20100208134605.GA16433@redhat.com> <4B702169.2000405@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20100208145515.GB20595@redhat.com> List-Id: To: lvm-devel@redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, Feb 08 2010 at 9:36am -0500, Peter Rajnoha wrote: > On 02/08/2010 02:46 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > > > Dracut is rw but we (dracut's lvm hooks) impose read-only locking > > through dracut's lvm.conf. This was done so no metadata updates could > > occur within the initramfs environment. > > Yes, dracut environment is rw but the root fs itself is mounted ro first. > The "vgchange -a y --ignorelockingfailure" (that is called after the pivotroot) > is run just before the rw remount happens (..looking at Fedora/RHEL6 rc.sysinit). > > We didn't notice that directly before, because init_locking silently "failed" > (but returned with OK status from init_locking fn, since --ignorelockingfailure is set). Shouldn't rc.sysinit's "vgchange -a y --ignorelockingfailure" come _after_ root's rw remount? Dracut has already taken care of activating any LVs needed for the root FS. What advantage is there in trying to activate other (non-root) LVs before root is rw? Mike