[linux-lvm] Patch needed for kernel 2.4.2 ?

[linux-lvm] Patch needed for kernel 2.4.2 ?

[Brian Poole]

Hello all,

First of all, thanks for all the hard work ;) I've been running LVM on a
production server for over 6 months now and never have had it fail on me.

*knocks on wood*

Getting to the point, I'm upgrading hardware on my server & I intend to
upgrade the kernel from 2.4.0-test7 to 2.4.2 as well, as I have to add
some drivers anyways I might as well get the bug fixes in. My question is
do I have to patch anything in the kernel for LVM? I notice that the
README in beta 5, which I assume I should be upgrading to, has a bit of
info about patches, but looking in PATCHES/ there are only patches for
2.4.1, as 2.4.2 hadn't been released at the time. Have these patches
already been incorporated into 2.4.2, or if not, will they still apply
cleanly to 2.4.2 and are they needed?

Any other tips, hints and tricks would be appreciated for this upgrade.
Moving to 0.8 final -> 0.9 beta 5a, adding new drives to the VG,
expanding the LV and the FS and I must say, I'm a bit nervous ;) Restoring
100G from tapes is never fun. I have already read the relevant sections in
the HOWTO, but as always, I'm willing to take any other advice people wish
to throw at me, whether on the list or off.

Thanks for the time,

-b

Re: [linux-lvm] Patch needed for kernel 2.4.2 ?

[AJ Lewis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2555 bytes --]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:23:53PM -0500, Brian Poole wrote:
> First of all, thanks for all the hard work ;) I've been running LVM on a
> production server for over 6 months now and never have had it fail on me.

Great!

> Getting to the point, I'm upgrading hardware on my server & I intend to
> upgrade the kernel from 2.4.0-test7 to 2.4.2 as well, as I have to add
> some drivers anyways I might as well get the bug fixes in. My question is
> do I have to patch anything in the kernel for LVM? I notice that the
> README in beta 5, which I assume I should be upgrading to, has a bit of
> info about patches, but looking in PATCHES/ there are only patches for
> 2.4.1, as 2.4.2 hadn't been released at the time. Have these patches
> already been incorporated into 2.4.2, or if not, will they still apply
> cleanly to 2.4.2 and are they needed?

Read the README in the PATCHES directory.  This explains how to generate a
patch for your kernel.  And yes, you do need to patch the kernel.  The IOP
version was reved to 11, and the 2.4.2 kernel still has 0.9.1 Beta2 LVM
code, which is IOP 10, so the Beta5 tools will not work with it.

> Any other tips, hints and tricks would be appreciated for this upgrade.
> Moving to 0.8 final -> 0.9 beta 5a, adding new drives to the VG,
> expanding the LV and the FS and I must say, I'm a bit nervous ;) Restoring
> 100G from tapes is never fun. I have already read the relevant sections in
> the HOWTO, but as always, I'm willing to take any other advice people wish
> to throw at me, whether on the list or off.

I'll just advise you to make sure your backup is current.  I haven't heard
of any problems with Beta5 yet, but it's better to be safe than lose your
data.  It is a beta relese you know.  ;)  Other than that, the migration
process *should* be smooth.  Let us know if you run into any problems.

Regards,
-- 
AJ Lewis
Sistina Software Inc.                  Voice:  612-379-3951
1313 5th St SE, Suite 111              Fax:    612-379-3952
Minneapolis, MN 55414                  E-Mail: lewis@sistina.com
http://www.sistina.com

Current GPG fingerprint = 3B5F 6011 5216 76A5 2F6B  52A0 941E 1261 0029 2648
Get my key at: http://www.sistina.com/~lewis/gpgkey
 (Unfortunately, the PKS-type keyservers do not work with multiple sub-keys)

-----Begin Obligatory Humorous Quote----------------------------------------
A morning without coffee is like something without something else.
-----End Obligatory Humorous Quote------------------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [linux-lvm] Patch needed for kernel 2.4.2 ?

[John Marquart]

Is there a way to configure / install the tools such that they can fall
back to handle IOP 10?  I enjoy helping test new beta code (Great job by
the way - I have yet to have ANY problems w/ the beta versions i have
tested) - but it becomes quite a bit more stressful when the userspace
tools are not backwards compatible.  Am I just overlooking something, or
is there truly no backwards compatibility in IOP11 tools to IOP10 and/or
IOP6?

thanks,
-john


On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, AJ Lewis wrote:

> Read the README in the PATCHES directory.  This explains how to generate a
> patch for your kernel.  And yes, you do need to patch the kernel.  The IOP
> version was reved to 11, and the 2.4.2 kernel still has 0.9.1 Beta2 LVM
> code, which is IOP 10, so the Beta5 tools will not work with it.





John "Jamie" Marquart		|     This message posted 100% MS free.
Digital Library SysAdmin	|  Work: 812-856-5174   Pager: 812-334-6018
Indiana University Libraries	|  ICQ: 1131494	 	D'net Team:  6265

Re: [linux-lvm] Patch needed for kernel 2.4.2 ?

[Andreas Dilger]

John Marquart writes:
> Is there a way to configure / install the tools such that they can fall
> back to handle IOP 10?  I enjoy helping test new beta code (Great job by
> the way - I have yet to have ANY problems w/ the beta versions i have
> tested) - but it becomes quite a bit more stressful when the userspace
> tools are not backwards compatible.  Am I just overlooking something, or
> is there truly no backwards compatibility in IOP11 tools to IOP10 and/or
> IOP6?

It is possible to install the LVM tools such that there are multiple
versions of the tools installed, and the correct ones are chosen based
on the kernel IOP version.  There _really_ is no compatibility between
the tools, which is why I am advocating that the LVM IOP be reverted
to 10, along with a fix in the beta4 bug that caused this issue, rather
than increasing to IOP 11.

You need a wrapper script in /sbin which points to the correct tools
directory (below).  If you are upgrading an existing IOP6 system, move ALL
of the LVM tools from /sbin to /lib/lvm-iop6, put the wrapper script in
/sbin/vgchange, and link to it for EACH LVM tool, like:

ln /sbin/vgchange /sbin/vgcreate

You NEED the lvmiopversion command (from beta4+) in /sbin as well.

If you install the beta3 tools, you get IOP10 (which works with what is
in the official kernel), beta4 and beta5 will only work properly with a
kernel patch.  The problem is in the user tools and not the new kernel
code.  A beta4/beta5 patched kernel will work just fine with IOP 10 tools
(assuming that the IOP checking didn't stop us), but a beta3 or earlier
kernel (i.e. what is currently in Linus' tree) will only allow you to
use a single VG with beta4 tools.

So - I would suggest patching your kernel with the beta5 kernel patch
(to get the latest fixes), and keep the IOP6 tools around in /lib/lvm-iop6
in case you need to go back.  If you want the IOP10 tools (in case you
accidentally build an unpatched Linus kernel), you need to use beta3 for now.

Cheers, Andreas
==========================  wrapper script  ================================
#!/bin/sh
#
# This is a wrapper to call the appropriate LVM userspace tools based
# on the IOP version in use.
#
# 20001221  Claudio Matsuoka <clausio@conectiva.com>
# - using lvmiopversion to get the IOP version
#
# 20001220  Andreas Dilger <adilger@turbolinux.com>
# - fixed return values
# - better error messages
#
# 20001217  Claudio Matsuoka <claudio@conectiva.com>
# - first version

util=`basename $0`
iopver=/sbin/lvmiopversion
IOP=`$iopver`

if [ ! -x $iopver -o -z "$IOP" ]; then
    echo "$util: $iopver not found or can't determine IOP version" 1>&2
    exit 1
fi

lvmpkg=lvm-iop$IOP
liblvm=/lib/$lvmpkg

if [ ! -d $liblvm ]; then
    echo "$util: $liblvm not found.  Is $lvmpkg installed?" 1>&2
    exit 3
fi

exec $liblvm/$util "$@" # this will print out a localized error message for us

-- 
Andreas Dilger  \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
                 \  would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/               -- Dogbert