From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hannes Reinecke Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use udev rules to create dmraid /dev/mapper/ devices Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2015 13:54:55 +0200 Message-ID: <559BBE0F.1070903@suse.com> References: <1435330557-17685-9-git-send-email-trenn@suse.de> <1435599415-10187-1-git-send-email-trenn@suse.de> <559BBAF5.5000501@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <559BBAF5.5000501-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: initramfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: Harald Hoyer , Thomas Renninger Cc: initramfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Heinz Mauelshagen On 07/07/2015 01:41 PM, Harald Hoyer wrote: > On 29.06.2015 19:36, Thomas Renninger wrote: >> From: Hannes Reinecke >> >> https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D905746 >> >> Version 2: Remove 64-md-raid.rules >> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Renninger >> --- >> modules.d/90dmraid/dmraid.sh | 2 -- >> modules.d/90dmraid/module-setup.sh | 2 ++ >> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/modules.d/90dmraid/dmraid.sh b/modules.d/90dmraid/dmrai= d.sh >> index 3dcff38..cc4390f 100755 >> --- a/modules.d/90dmraid/dmraid.sh >> +++ b/modules.d/90dmraid/dmraid.sh >> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ if [ -n "$DM_RAIDS" ] || getargbool 0 rd.auto; the= n >> if [ "${s##$r}" !=3D "$s" ]; then >> info "Activating $s" >> dmraid -ay -i -p --rm_partitions "$s" 2>&1 | vi= nfo >> - [ -e "/dev/mapper/$s" ] && kpartx -a "/dev/mapp= er/$s" 2>&1 | vinfo >> - udevsettle >> fi >> done >> done >> diff --git a/modules.d/90dmraid/module-setup.sh b/modules.d/90dmraid= /module-setup.sh >> index e8de5f5..797a58e 100755 >> --- a/modules.d/90dmraid/module-setup.sh >> +++ b/modules.d/90dmraid/module-setup.sh >> @@ -74,6 +74,8 @@ install() { >> =20 >> inst "$moddir/dmraid.sh" /sbin/dmraid_scan >> =20 >> + inst_rules 66-kpartx.rules 67-kpartx-compat.rules >> + >> inst_libdir_file "libdmraid-events*.so*" >> =20 >> inst_rules "$moddir/61-dmraid-imsm.rules" >> >=20 > Fedora does not have 66-kpartx.rules nor 67-kpartx-compat.rules ... >=20 > Heinz, do we need the kpartx part still? >=20 > I reverted to kpartx, because "dmraid" adds a "p" as a seperator by d= efault for > the partitions and this breaks existing installations. >=20 I would recommend splitting the kpartx call into a separate udev rule; otherwise you'll run into timing issues with udev. Cheers, Hannes --=20 Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage hare-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg GF: F. Imend=F6rffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton HRB 21284 (AG N=FCrnberg)