From: Phillip Susi <psusi@cfl.rr.com>
To: The development of GNU GRUB <grub-devel@gnu.org>
Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, John Sheu <john.sheu@gmail.com>,
Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Subject: Re: Software RAID and Fakeraid
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 19:08:09 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D48A069.8010202@cfl.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110201162642.GU343@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
On 02/01/2011 11:26 AM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> If the raid stores the raid info at the end, then the data starts at
> sector 0. So no space for a bootloader at all.
I know that is how it works with 0.9, but are you sure it is for 1.0?
If so, then for anything but raid-1 we will just have to try to install
only to the first device if it has an MBR.
> Certainly makes sense. Now is 4K enough for a boot loader? Not sure.
It is enough for the MBR. The core image will need to go elsewhere,
hence the proposal to ask mdadm for a suitable location.
> I personally consider soft raid on raw devices so convluted that I
> have never done it. I would rather have something I know works with my
> bootloader and other tools, than gain that extra 1MB (at most) that not
> having partitions gives. Also given many PCs won't boot from a drive
> without a partition table, it isn't even an option then.
That is why I like the idea of 1.2 since you could still have a bootable
MBR when using the whole disk. Though now that you mention it, I can't
think of a good reason to use the whole disk instead of a partition either.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Phillip Susi <psusi@cfl.rr.com>
To: The development of GNU GRUB <grub-devel@gnu.org>
Cc: Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>, John Sheu <john.sheu@gmail.com>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Software RAID and Fakeraid
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 19:08:09 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D48A069.8010202@cfl.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110201162642.GU343@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
On 02/01/2011 11:26 AM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> If the raid stores the raid info at the end, then the data starts at
> sector 0. So no space for a bootloader at all.
I know that is how it works with 0.9, but are you sure it is for 1.0?
If so, then for anything but raid-1 we will just have to try to install
only to the first device if it has an MBR.
> Certainly makes sense. Now is 4K enough for a boot loader? Not sure.
It is enough for the MBR. The core image will need to go elsewhere,
hence the proposal to ask mdadm for a suitable location.
> I personally consider soft raid on raw devices so convluted that I
> have never done it. I would rather have something I know works with my
> bootloader and other tools, than gain that extra 1MB (at most) that not
> having partitions gives. Also given many PCs won't boot from a drive
> without a partition table, it isn't even an option then.
That is why I like the idea of 1.2 since you could still have a bootable
MBR when using the whole disk. Though now that you mention it, I can't
think of a good reason to use the whole disk instead of a partition either.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-02 0:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-25 10:26 Software RAID and Fakeraid John Sheu
2010-11-30 19:54 ` Phillip Susi
2010-11-30 19:54 ` Phillip Susi
2010-11-30 22:25 ` Neil Brown
2010-11-30 22:25 ` Neil Brown
2010-12-02 22:13 ` Phillip Susi
2010-12-02 22:13 ` Phillip Susi
2010-12-03 1:36 ` Neil Brown
2010-12-03 1:36 ` Neil Brown
2010-12-03 3:15 ` Phillip Susi
2010-12-08 22:43 ` Neil Brown
2010-12-08 22:43 ` Neil Brown
2010-12-09 19:48 ` Phillip Susi
2010-12-09 19:48 ` Phillip Susi
2011-01-31 16:44 ` Phillip Susi
2011-01-31 17:03 ` Lennart Sorensen
2011-01-31 19:21 ` Phillip Susi
2011-01-31 19:21 ` Phillip Susi
2011-01-31 22:12 ` Lennart Sorensen
2011-02-01 1:31 ` Phillip Susi
2011-02-01 1:31 ` Phillip Susi
2011-02-01 11:04 ` Michal Suchanek
2011-02-01 11:04 ` Michal Suchanek
2011-02-01 16:26 ` Lennart Sorensen
2011-02-01 16:26 ` Lennart Sorensen
2011-02-02 0:08 ` Phillip Susi [this message]
2011-02-02 0:08 ` Phillip Susi
2011-02-02 3:22 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-02 3:22 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-02 15:34 ` Phillip Susi
2011-02-02 15:34 ` Phillip Susi
2011-02-02 16:09 ` hansbkk
2011-02-02 16:09 ` hansbkk
2011-02-02 21:12 ` Leslie Rhorer
2010-12-04 4:34 ` Leslie Rhorer
2010-12-07 17:21 ` Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
2010-12-25 19:55 ` Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4D48A069.8010202@cfl.rr.com \
--to=psusi@cfl.rr.com \
--cc=grub-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=john.sheu@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.