linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Autostarting arrays with V1 metadata
@ 2008-05-07 18:03 Ben Winslow
  2008-05-08  3:05 ` Neil Brown
  2008-05-08  8:19 ` David Greaves
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ben Winslow @ 2008-05-07 18:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-raid

I've noticed that (as of 2.6.25, at least) the kernel doesn't autostart 
arrays with V1 metadata.  In autostart_arrays(), md_import_device() is 
called for 0.90 arrays only, and there's currently no sort of 
autodetection of the superblock position for V1 metadata.

Is this simply a matter of the code being unwritten, or are there other 
reasons that V1 arrays aren't autostarted (such as the SB format being 
unfinished)?  My only real motivation to use V1 metadata is the unhashed 
homehost field, which I'll give up if the SB format hasn't stabilized yet.

Thanks,
-- 
Ben Winslow <rain@bluecherry.net>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: Autostarting arrays with V1 metadata
  2008-05-07 18:03 Autostarting arrays with V1 metadata Ben Winslow
@ 2008-05-08  3:05 ` Neil Brown
  2008-05-08 14:50   ` Bryan Mesich
  2008-05-08  8:19 ` David Greaves
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Neil Brown @ 2008-05-08  3:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ben Winslow; +Cc: linux-raid

On Wednesday May 7, rain@bluecherry.net wrote:
> I've noticed that (as of 2.6.25, at least) the kernel doesn't autostart 
> arrays with V1 metadata.  In autostart_arrays(), md_import_device() is 
> called for 0.90 arrays only, and there's currently no sort of 
> autodetection of the superblock position for V1 metadata.
> 
> Is this simply a matter of the code being unwritten, or are there other 
> reasons that V1 arrays aren't autostarted (such as the SB format being 
> unfinished)?  My only real motivation to use V1 metadata is the unhashed 
> homehost field, which I'll give up if the SB format hasn't stabilized yet.

V1.x metadata (deliberately) doesn't contain sufficient information to
allow in-kernel autodetect.  In particular it doesn't store the 'minor
number' information so the kernel wouldn't know which md device to
use.

However it is quite possible to assemble V1.x arrays using mdadm in an
initrd.  This is the preferred method.

Ofcourse, if the array doesn't hold the root filesystem, you can just
assemble it as part of the regular boot scripts.

NeilBrown

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: Autostarting arrays with V1 metadata
  2008-05-07 18:03 Autostarting arrays with V1 metadata Ben Winslow
  2008-05-08  3:05 ` Neil Brown
@ 2008-05-08  8:19 ` David Greaves
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: David Greaves @ 2008-05-08  8:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ben Winslow; +Cc: linux-raid

Ben Winslow wrote:
> I've noticed that (as of 2.6.25, at least) the kernel doesn't autostart
> arrays with V1 metadata.  In autostart_arrays(), md_import_device() is
> called for 0.90 arrays only, and there's currently no sort of
> autodetection of the superblock position for V1 metadata.
> 
> Is this simply a matter of the code being unwritten, or are there other
> reasons that V1 arrays aren't autostarted (such as the SB format being
> unfinished)?  My only real motivation to use V1 metadata is the unhashed
> homehost field, which I'll give up if the SB format hasn't stabilized yet.
> 
> Thanks,

Also, FYI:
  http://linux-raid.osdl.org/index.php/Autodetect

and
  http://linux-raid.osdl.org/index.php/RAID_Boot

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: Autostarting arrays with V1 metadata
  2008-05-08  3:05 ` Neil Brown
@ 2008-05-08 14:50   ` Bryan Mesich
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Bryan Mesich @ 2008-05-08 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-raid

On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 01:05:44PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:

[snip...]

> However it is quite possible to assemble V1.x arrays using mdadm in an
> initrd.  This is the preferred method.


I wasn't aware there's a "preferred method" to assembling an
array at boot time.  Could you please elaborate as to why
assembling in user space would be better? (besides having the
ability to assemble non 0.9 metadata)

Just curious :-)

Bryan

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2008-05-08 14:50 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-05-07 18:03 Autostarting arrays with V1 metadata Ben Winslow
2008-05-08  3:05 ` Neil Brown
2008-05-08 14:50   ` Bryan Mesich
2008-05-08  8:19 ` David Greaves

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).