Re: Failover root devices

[Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1527 bytes --]

On 2015-09-17 14:40, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 17.09.2015 um 20:37 schrieb Austin S Hemmelgarn:
>> On 2015-09-17 13:47, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2015-09-17  1:40 PM, Ortwin Glück wrote:
>>>>> You can do that completely in user space from an initramfs.
>>>>
>>>> Yep, I'm aware of that. I think it would still be useful for the kernel
>>>> to support it. Bonus - if the kernel supports it, there's a standard way
>>>> of doing it that would propegate down to the various initramfs designs
>>>> of the distros without having me write patches against all of them.
>>>> Right?
>>>
>>> I really don't see why we need this feature in-kernel as it can be
>>> done perfectly fine
>>> in userspace. Every non-trivial system needs an initramfs anyway these days.
>>>
>> Ha, not unless you're using systemd.  I have more than 2 dozen servers with complex setups that boot just fine without an initramfs.  Yes there is more setup done in initramfs
>> these days, but it's still not actually needed in most cases except complicated storage setups.
>
> I really don't count root=UUID... or root=LABEL... as complicated storage setup...
>
> Thanks,
> //richard
>
That's not what I mean, I mean stuff like /usr and /var on separate 
filesystems, in a couple of cases self-assembling MD arrays, and in a 
couple of cases ATAoE or iSCSI backed root filesystems on hardware that 
doesn't natively support booting such devices.


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 3019 bytes --]