Re: Linux mdadm superblock question.
From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Sun Feb 14 2010 - 16:18:46 EST
On 02/14/2010 12:25 PM, Asdo wrote:
> I don't understand...
> In a system we have, the root filesystem on a raid-6 which is on second
> (and last) partitions of many disks.
> It always assembled correctly, it never tried to assemble the whole device.
> (on the first partition there is a raid1 with boot)
> So what's the problem exactly with not marking the beginning?
In Fedora 12, for example, Dracut tries to make the distinction between
whole RAID device and a partition device, and utterly fails -- often
resulting in data loss.
With a pointer to the beginning this would have been a trivial thing to
detect.
IMO it would make sense to support autoassemble for 1.0 superblocks, and
making them the default. The purpose would be to get everyone off 0.9.
However, *any* default is better than 1.1.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/