From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [10.40.200.21] (ovpn-200-21.brq.redhat.com [10.40.200.21]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id tBO94R7Q021475 for ; Thu, 24 Dec 2015 04:04:28 -0500 References: From: Zdenek Kabelac Message-ID: <567BB51A.4070101@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:04:26 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Possible bug in expanding thinpool: lvextend doens't expand the top-level dm-linear device 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" To: LVM general discussion and development Dne 23.12.2015 v 10:50 M.H. Tsai napsal(a): > Hi All, > > I'm running LVM2.2.02.138 on Ubuntu 14.04. When I try to expand a > thinpool, I found that lvextend doesn't expand the top-level dm-linear > device of the thinpool. The following are the reproduce steps > > # lvcreate vg1 --type thin-pool --thinpool tp1 --size 1g > --poolmetadataspare=n -Zn > # lvcreate vg1 --type thin --thinpool tp1 --virtualsize 100m --name lvol0 > # lvextend vg1/tp1 --size +100m > > After running lvextend, the table of vg1-tp1_tdata and vg1-tp1-tpool > are expanded, but the dm-linear table of vg1-tp1 remains unchanged. > > I think that the function _lv_update_and_reload() erroneously operates > on the holder of of tp1, that is, lvol0. This might be caused by > commit fa64823, hence the subsequent actions runs on the lock_lv. The > verbose output also shows that the tree_action() is running on lvol0, > not tp1. > > Creating PRELOAD tree for vg1/lvol0. > Creating SUSPEND tree for vg1/lvol0. > Creating ACTIVATE tree for vg1/lvol0. > Creating CLEAN tree for vg1/lvol0. > > Is that a bug? > > > Thanks, > Ming-Hung Tsai Hi Please check with commit cd8e95d9337207a8f87a6f68dc9b1db7e3828bbf included (2.02.139). It's been known issue, the size of top-level 'fake' pool device is however not really important - no one should be actually using it and the size could have been artificial. In fact - I do plan to rework this 'pool' device 'faking' to avoid need of this 'extra' device - but it's 'a little bit' complex - so it will take some time (I've even fix to correct the size of fake device - but then I've realized it would be actually much better without it) So do not worry about the size of this device - the only device which does matter is -tpool. Regards Zdenek