Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add nonfs partition type 0xda (#1263835)

["Brian C. Lane" <bcl-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 11:02:25AM -0400, Phil Susi wrote:
> On 10/8/2015 5:49 PM, Brian C. Lane wrote:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1118065 has a pile of
> > discussion on it.
> > 
> > What it amounts to is that on msdos partitioned disks mdadm only wants
> > 0xfd to be used for version 0.90 arrays which the kernel can
> > autoassemble, for 1.x arrays some other type needs to be used.
> 
> So use 0x80?  That's what I always have done and it has never been a
> problem.  Likewise, 0xfd won't cause a problem either: it will trigger
> kernel auto activation *if* you boot with no initramfs, *and* the
> partition does contain 0.90 metadata.  If it has 1.x, then it won't
> trigger auto activation, but has no other negative consequence.
> 
> I see from the discussion in that bug report that the mdadm man page
> recommends this type code.  Is there any reason for that recommendation?
>  Are there any consequences to not following it?  Cc'ing mdadm list to
> see if they can answer this.
> 

I think their thinking is that 0x80 implies a filesystem.

I really don't see any harm in adding it, if you don't want to use it,
don't.

-- 
Brian C. Lane | Anaconda Team | IRC: bcl #anaconda | Port Orchard, WA (PST8PDT)