* [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks
@ 2012-01-23 12:06 Lukasz Dorau
2012-01-30 1:27 ` NeilBrown
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Lukasz Dorau @ 2012-01-23 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: neilb; +Cc: linux-raid, dan.j.williams, marcin.labun, ed.ciechanowski
If the device's name is given in /etc/mdadm.conf, create_mddev()
does not check if the map contains a device of this name (mdopen.c:140).
If it does, the symlink of that name will be overwritten.
create_mddev() has been changed. Now it checks if the map contains
a device of the name given in /etc/mdadm.conf.
If it does, the appropriate suffix is added to the given name.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
---
mdopen.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mdopen.c b/mdopen.c
index eac1c1f..3078de6 100644
--- a/mdopen.c
+++ b/mdopen.c
@@ -147,10 +147,12 @@ int create_mddev(char *dev, char *name, int autof, int trustworthy,
char *cname;
char devname[20];
char cbuf[400];
+ struct map_ent *map = NULL;
+ int dev_conflict = 0;
+
if (chosen == NULL)
chosen = cbuf;
-
if (autof == 0)
autof = ci->autof;
@@ -277,17 +279,21 @@ int create_mddev(char *dev, char *name, int autof, int trustworthy,
else
sprintf(devname, "/dev/md%d", num);
- if (cname[0] == 0 && name) {
+ if ((cname[0] != 0) && map_by_name(&map, cname))
+ dev_conflict = 1;
+
+ if ((cname[0] == 0 && name) || dev_conflict) {
/* Need to find a name if we can
* We don't completely trust 'name'. Truncate to
* reasonable length and remove '/'
*/
char *cp;
- struct map_ent *map = NULL;
int conflict = 1;
int unum = 0;
int cnlen;
- strncpy(cname, name, 200);
+
+ if (!dev_conflict)
+ strncpy(cname, name, 200);
cname[200] = 0;
while ((cp = strchr(cname, '/')) != NULL)
*cp = '-';
@@ -312,7 +318,7 @@ int create_mddev(char *dev, char *name, int autof, int trustworthy,
}
}
- if (dev && dev[0] == '/')
+ if ((dev && dev[0] == '/') && (!dev_conflict))
strcpy(chosen, dev);
else if (cname[0] == 0)
strcpy(chosen, devname);
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks
2012-01-23 12:06 [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks Lukasz Dorau
@ 2012-01-30 1:27 ` NeilBrown
2012-01-30 12:13 ` Dorau, Lukasz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: NeilBrown @ 2012-01-30 1:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lukasz Dorau; +Cc: linux-raid, dan.j.williams, marcin.labun, ed.ciechanowski
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2725 bytes --]
On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:06:52 +0100 Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
wrote:
> If the device's name is given in /etc/mdadm.conf, create_mddev()
> does not check if the map contains a device of this name (mdopen.c:140).
> If it does, the symlink of that name will be overwritten.
>
> create_mddev() has been changed. Now it checks if the map contains
> a device of the name given in /etc/mdadm.conf.
> If it does, the appropriate suffix is added to the given name.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
Can you please remind me what the big picture problem is here??
It seem like you are suggesting that if
/dev/md/thing
is given in mdadm.conf, but some other array is already assembled with the
name /dev/md/thing, then the array from mdadm.conf should be assembled as
/dev/md/thing0
or something like that - is that correct?
I don't think we want that. If there is a name conflict like this with a
name given in mdadm.conf, then one of the arrays should fail to assemble as
this is really a fairly serious configuration error.
Or did I misunderstand?
Thanks,
NeilBrown
> ---
> mdopen.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mdopen.c b/mdopen.c
> index eac1c1f..3078de6 100644
> --- a/mdopen.c
> +++ b/mdopen.c
> @@ -147,10 +147,12 @@ int create_mddev(char *dev, char *name, int autof, int trustworthy,
> char *cname;
> char devname[20];
> char cbuf[400];
> + struct map_ent *map = NULL;
> + int dev_conflict = 0;
> +
> if (chosen == NULL)
> chosen = cbuf;
>
> -
> if (autof == 0)
> autof = ci->autof;
>
> @@ -277,17 +279,21 @@ int create_mddev(char *dev, char *name, int autof, int trustworthy,
> else
> sprintf(devname, "/dev/md%d", num);
>
> - if (cname[0] == 0 && name) {
> + if ((cname[0] != 0) && map_by_name(&map, cname))
> + dev_conflict = 1;
> +
> + if ((cname[0] == 0 && name) || dev_conflict) {
> /* Need to find a name if we can
> * We don't completely trust 'name'. Truncate to
> * reasonable length and remove '/'
> */
> char *cp;
> - struct map_ent *map = NULL;
> int conflict = 1;
> int unum = 0;
> int cnlen;
> - strncpy(cname, name, 200);
> +
> + if (!dev_conflict)
> + strncpy(cname, name, 200);
> cname[200] = 0;
> while ((cp = strchr(cname, '/')) != NULL)
> *cp = '-';
> @@ -312,7 +318,7 @@ int create_mddev(char *dev, char *name, int autof, int trustworthy,
> }
> }
>
> - if (dev && dev[0] == '/')
> + if ((dev && dev[0] == '/') && (!dev_conflict))
> strcpy(chosen, dev);
> else if (cname[0] == 0)
> strcpy(chosen, devname);
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks
2012-01-30 1:27 ` NeilBrown
@ 2012-01-30 12:13 ` Dorau, Lukasz
2012-01-30 22:13 ` NeilBrown
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Dorau, Lukasz @ 2012-01-30 12:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: NeilBrown
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Williams, Dan J, Labun, Marcin,
Ciechanowski, Ed
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NeilBrown [mailto:neilb@suse.de]
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 2:27 AM
> To: Dorau, Lukasz
> Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Labun, Marcin; Ciechanowski,
> Ed
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks
>
> On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:06:52 +0100 Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
> wrote:
>
> > If the device's name is given in /etc/mdadm.conf, create_mddev()
> > does not check if the map contains a device of this name (mdopen.c:140).
> > If it does, the symlink of that name will be overwritten.
> >
> > create_mddev() has been changed. Now it checks if the map contains
> > a device of the name given in /etc/mdadm.conf.
> > If it does, the appropriate suffix is added to the given name.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
>
> Can you please remind me what the big picture problem is here??
>
> It seem like you are suggesting that if
> /dev/md/thing
>
> is given in mdadm.conf, but some other array is already assembled with the
> name /dev/md/thing, then the array from mdadm.conf should be assembled as
> /dev/md/thing0
> or something like that - is that correct?
>
> I don't think we want that. If there is a name conflict like this with a
> name given in mdadm.conf, then one of the arrays should fail to assemble as
> this is really a fairly serious configuration error.
>
> Or did I misunderstand?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NeilBrown [mailto:neilb@suse.de]
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 2:30 AM
> To: Dorau, Lukasz
> Subject: Re: mdadm: checking dev's names from mdadm.conf - question
>
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:27:58 +0000 "Dorau, Lukasz" <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Is it OK that mdadm does not check if a symlink of the name given in
> /etc/mdadm.conf already exists (in function create_mddev() in mdopen.c:140) ?
> >
> > For example:
> > If we modify the original /etc/mdadm.conf file:
> >
> > ARRAY metadata=imsm UUID=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> > ARRAY /dev/md/vol1 container=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> member=0 UUID=ea776aa6:4691d6ee:9400457e:73e1e9d9
> > ARRAY metadata=imsm UUID=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> > ARRAY /dev/md/vol2 container=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> member=0 UUID=b33bbd5e:964c7acc:66cfdfcc:7a938902
> >
> > by adding the 2nd container 's name /dev/md/imsm0 to the 3rd line:
> >
> > ARRAY metadata=imsm UUID=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> > ARRAY /dev/md/vol1 container=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> member=0 UUID=ea776aa6:4691d6ee:9400457e:73e1e9d9
> > ARRAY /dev/md/imsm0 metadata=imsm
> UUID=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> > ARRAY /dev/md/vol2 container=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> member=0 UUID=b33bbd5e:964c7acc:66cfdfcc:7a938902
> >
> > mdadm will create the first container /dev/md127 and the symlink of default
> name /dev/md/imsm0 (and the first volume /dev/md126 with symlink
> /dev/md/vol1).
> > Later it will create the second container /dev/md125 and the symlink of the
> name given in /etc/mdadm.conf - /dev/md/imsm0 - the same as the name of
> the first container.
> >
> > Mdadm does not check if the symlink of the given name already exists and it
> _overwrites_ the first symlink. Is it OK or maybe should it be corrected?
> >
>
> Ahhh.. this is where the big-picture bit is...
>
> I don't have a big problem with it over-writing the symlink - that is what
> you asked for in a way.
>
> However I also wouldn't have a problem with mdadm refusing the assemble the
> second container as its name is already in use.
>
So, are you going to apply this patch or do you want it to be fixed in another way?
Regards,
Lukasz
> > ---
> > mdopen.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
> > 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mdopen.c b/mdopen.c
> > index eac1c1f..3078de6 100644
> > --- a/mdopen.c
> > +++ b/mdopen.c
> > @@ -147,10 +147,12 @@ int create_mddev(char *dev, char *name, int autof,
> int trustworthy,
> > char *cname;
> > char devname[20];
> > char cbuf[400];
> > + struct map_ent *map = NULL;
> > + int dev_conflict = 0;
> > +
> > if (chosen == NULL)
> > chosen = cbuf;
> >
> > -
> > if (autof == 0)
> > autof = ci->autof;
> >
> > @@ -277,17 +279,21 @@ int create_mddev(char *dev, char *name, int autof,
> int trustworthy,
> > else
> > sprintf(devname, "/dev/md%d", num);
> >
> > - if (cname[0] == 0 && name) {
> > + if ((cname[0] != 0) && map_by_name(&map, cname))
> > + dev_conflict = 1;
> > +
> > + if ((cname[0] == 0 && name) || dev_conflict) {
> > /* Need to find a name if we can
> > * We don't completely trust 'name'. Truncate to
> > * reasonable length and remove '/'
> > */
> > char *cp;
> > - struct map_ent *map = NULL;
> > int conflict = 1;
> > int unum = 0;
> > int cnlen;
> > - strncpy(cname, name, 200);
> > +
> > + if (!dev_conflict)
> > + strncpy(cname, name, 200);
> > cname[200] = 0;
> > while ((cp = strchr(cname, '/')) != NULL)
> > *cp = '-';
> > @@ -312,7 +318,7 @@ int create_mddev(char *dev, char *name, int autof,
> int trustworthy,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - if (dev && dev[0] == '/')
> > + if ((dev && dev[0] == '/') && (!dev_conflict))
> > strcpy(chosen, dev);
> > else if (cname[0] == 0)
> > strcpy(chosen, devname);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks
2012-01-30 12:13 ` Dorau, Lukasz
@ 2012-01-30 22:13 ` NeilBrown
2012-01-31 8:00 ` Dorau, Lukasz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: NeilBrown @ 2012-01-30 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dorau, Lukasz
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Williams, Dan J, Labun, Marcin,
Ciechanowski, Ed
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4348 bytes --]
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:13:05 +0000 "Dorau, Lukasz" <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: NeilBrown [mailto:neilb@suse.de]
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 2:27 AM
> > To: Dorau, Lukasz
> > Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Labun, Marcin; Ciechanowski,
> > Ed
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:06:52 +0100 Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If the device's name is given in /etc/mdadm.conf, create_mddev()
> > > does not check if the map contains a device of this name (mdopen.c:140).
> > > If it does, the symlink of that name will be overwritten.
> > >
> > > create_mddev() has been changed. Now it checks if the map contains
> > > a device of the name given in /etc/mdadm.conf.
> > > If it does, the appropriate suffix is added to the given name.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
> >
> > Can you please remind me what the big picture problem is here??
> >
> > It seem like you are suggesting that if
> > /dev/md/thing
> >
> > is given in mdadm.conf, but some other array is already assembled with the
> > name /dev/md/thing, then the array from mdadm.conf should be assembled as
> > /dev/md/thing0
> > or something like that - is that correct?
> >
> > I don't think we want that. If there is a name conflict like this with a
> > name given in mdadm.conf, then one of the arrays should fail to assemble as
> > this is really a fairly serious configuration error.
> >
> > Or did I misunderstand?
> >
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: NeilBrown [mailto:neilb@suse.de]
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 2:30 AM
> > To: Dorau, Lukasz
> > Subject: Re: mdadm: checking dev's names from mdadm.conf - question
> >
> > On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:27:58 +0000 "Dorau, Lukasz" <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Is it OK that mdadm does not check if a symlink of the name given in
> > /etc/mdadm.conf already exists (in function create_mddev() in mdopen.c:140) ?
> > >
> > > For example:
> > > If we modify the original /etc/mdadm.conf file:
> > >
> > > ARRAY metadata=imsm UUID=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> > > ARRAY /dev/md/vol1 container=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> > member=0 UUID=ea776aa6:4691d6ee:9400457e:73e1e9d9
> > > ARRAY metadata=imsm UUID=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> > > ARRAY /dev/md/vol2 container=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> > member=0 UUID=b33bbd5e:964c7acc:66cfdfcc:7a938902
> > >
> > > by adding the 2nd container 's name /dev/md/imsm0 to the 3rd line:
> > >
> > > ARRAY metadata=imsm UUID=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> > > ARRAY /dev/md/vol1 container=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> > member=0 UUID=ea776aa6:4691d6ee:9400457e:73e1e9d9
> > > ARRAY /dev/md/imsm0 metadata=imsm
> > UUID=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> > > ARRAY /dev/md/vol2 container=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> > member=0 UUID=b33bbd5e:964c7acc:66cfdfcc:7a938902
> > >
> > > mdadm will create the first container /dev/md127 and the symlink of default
> > name /dev/md/imsm0 (and the first volume /dev/md126 with symlink
> > /dev/md/vol1).
> > > Later it will create the second container /dev/md125 and the symlink of the
> > name given in /etc/mdadm.conf - /dev/md/imsm0 - the same as the name of
> > the first container.
> > >
> > > Mdadm does not check if the symlink of the given name already exists and it
> > _overwrites_ the first symlink. Is it OK or maybe should it be corrected?
> > >
> >
> > Ahhh.. this is where the big-picture bit is...
> >
> > I don't have a big problem with it over-writing the symlink - that is what
> > you asked for in a way.
> >
> > However I also wouldn't have a problem with mdadm refusing the assemble the
> > second container as its name is already in use.
> >
>
>
> So, are you going to apply this patch or do you want it to be fixed in another way?
The approaches I said were OK were:
1/ over-write the symlink
2/ refuse to assemble the second container
The approach the patch takes is
3/ use a different name to the one in mdadm.conf
As 3 != 1 and 3 != 2, I'm not going to apply the patch.
NeilBrown
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks
2012-01-30 22:13 ` NeilBrown
@ 2012-01-31 8:00 ` Dorau, Lukasz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Dorau, Lukasz @ 2012-01-31 8:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: NeilBrown
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Williams, Dan J, Labun, Marcin,
Ciechanowski, Ed
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NeilBrown [mailto:neilb@suse.de]
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 11:14 PM
> To: Dorau, Lukasz
> Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Labun, Marcin; Ciechanowski,
> Ed
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks
>
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:13:05 +0000 "Dorau, Lukasz"
> <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: NeilBrown [mailto:neilb@suse.de]
> > > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 2:27 AM
> > > To: Dorau, Lukasz
> > > Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org; Williams, Dan J; Labun, Marcin;
> Ciechanowski,
> > > Ed
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks
> > >
> > > On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:06:52 +0100 Lukasz Dorau
> <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > If the device's name is given in /etc/mdadm.conf, create_mddev()
> > > > does not check if the map contains a device of this name (mdopen.c:140).
> > > > If it does, the symlink of that name will be overwritten.
> > > >
> > > > create_mddev() has been changed. Now it checks if the map contains
> > > > a device of the name given in /etc/mdadm.conf.
> > > > If it does, the appropriate suffix is added to the given name.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
> > >
> > > Can you please remind me what the big picture problem is here??
> > >
> > > It seem like you are suggesting that if
> > > /dev/md/thing
> > >
> > > is given in mdadm.conf, but some other array is already assembled with the
> > > name /dev/md/thing, then the array from mdadm.conf should be assembled
> as
> > > /dev/md/thing0
> > > or something like that - is that correct?
> > >
> > > I don't think we want that. If there is a name conflict like this with a
> > > name given in mdadm.conf, then one of the arrays should fail to assemble as
> > > this is really a fairly serious configuration error.
> > >
> > > Or did I misunderstand?
> > >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: NeilBrown [mailto:neilb@suse.de]
> > > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 2:30 AM
> > > To: Dorau, Lukasz
> > > Subject: Re: mdadm: checking dev's names from mdadm.conf - question
> > >
> > > On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:27:58 +0000 "Dorau, Lukasz"
> <lukasz.dorau@intel.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > Is it OK that mdadm does not check if a symlink of the name given in
> > > /etc/mdadm.conf already exists (in function create_mddev() in
> mdopen.c:140) ?
> > > >
> > > > For example:
> > > > If we modify the original /etc/mdadm.conf file:
> > > >
> > > > ARRAY metadata=imsm UUID=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> > > > ARRAY /dev/md/vol1 container=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> > > member=0 UUID=ea776aa6:4691d6ee:9400457e:73e1e9d9
> > > > ARRAY metadata=imsm UUID=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> > > > ARRAY /dev/md/vol2 container=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> > > member=0 UUID=b33bbd5e:964c7acc:66cfdfcc:7a938902
> > > >
> > > > by adding the 2nd container 's name /dev/md/imsm0 to the 3rd line:
> > > >
> > > > ARRAY metadata=imsm UUID=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> > > > ARRAY /dev/md/vol1 container=e92bcf10:ca6b3fbd:95904441:5472d320
> > > member=0 UUID=ea776aa6:4691d6ee:9400457e:73e1e9d9
> > > > ARRAY /dev/md/imsm0 metadata=imsm
> > > UUID=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> > > > ARRAY /dev/md/vol2 container=d61a8e6a:ed4e8ed6:dc0f4fb7:f839907e
> > > member=0 UUID=b33bbd5e:964c7acc:66cfdfcc:7a938902
> > > >
> > > > mdadm will create the first container /dev/md127 and the symlink of
> default
> > > name /dev/md/imsm0 (and the first volume /dev/md126 with symlink
> > > /dev/md/vol1).
> > > > Later it will create the second container /dev/md125 and the symlink of the
> > > name given in /etc/mdadm.conf - /dev/md/imsm0 - the same as the name of
> > > the first container.
> > > >
> > > > Mdadm does not check if the symlink of the given name already exists and
> it
> > > _overwrites_ the first symlink. Is it OK or maybe should it be corrected?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ahhh.. this is where the big-picture bit is...
> > >
> > > I don't have a big problem with it over-writing the symlink - that is what
> > > you asked for in a way.
> > >
> > > However I also wouldn't have a problem with mdadm refusing the assemble
> the
> > > second container as its name is already in use.
> > >
> >
> >
> > So, are you going to apply this patch or do you want it to be fixed in another
> way?
>
> The approaches I said were OK were:
> 1/ over-write the symlink
> 2/ refuse to assemble the second container
>
> The approach the patch takes is
> 3/ use a different name to the one in mdadm.conf
>
> As 3 != 1 and 3 != 2, I'm not going to apply the patch.
>
OK, I had misunderstood you previously.
Regards,
Lukasz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-01-31 8:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-01-23 12:06 [PATCH] fix: do not overwrite existing devices' symlinks Lukasz Dorau
2012-01-30 1:27 ` NeilBrown
2012-01-30 12:13 ` Dorau, Lukasz
2012-01-30 22:13 ` NeilBrown
2012-01-31 8:00 ` Dorau, Lukasz
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).