devfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: DevFS, 2.4.12, RAID

To: James Bromberger <james@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: DevFS, 2.4.12, RAID
From: Russell Coker <russell@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 10:58:45 +0100
Cc: herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, devfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20011110133220.A4185@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au>
References: <20011110133220.A4185@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au>
Reply-to: Russell Coker <russell@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-devfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 10 Nov 2001 06:32, James Bromberger wrote:
> I was just updating my RAID1 box to 2.4.12 from 2.4.8, and came across
> some problems. DevFS was not creating the files
>       /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part1, part2, ..etc...
>
> However, there was part 11, part 12, part 5, part 6. Doing a cfdisk
> on /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/disc showed very clearly that
> all original paritions were there (1-7, where 4 does't really
> exist because of the logical/physical/extended parition situation).
>
> Anyway, when I went back to 2.4.8, these partN partitions returned.

rjc@lyta:/tmp$ ls -l /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/
total 0
brw-rw----    1 root     disk       3,   0 Jan  1  1970 disc
brw-rw----    1 root     disk       3,   1 Jan  1  1970 part1
brw-rw----    1 root     disk       3,   2 Jan  1  1970 part2
brw-rw----    1 root     disk       3,   3 Jan  1  1970 part3
brw-rw----    1 root     disk       3,   4 Jan  1  1970 part4
brw-rw----    1 root     disk       3,   5 Jan  1  1970 part5
brw-rw----    1 root     disk       3,   6 Jan  1  1970 part6
brw-rw----    1 root     disk       3,   7 Jan  1  1970 part7
rjc@lyta:/tmp$ uname -a
Linux lyta 2.4.14-lsm #1 Tue Nov 6 16:16:39 CET 2001 i686 unknown
rjc@lyta:/tmp$

It also worked for me on 2.4.9, 10, 12, and 13.

> My guess is a bug in the devfs kernel code. But this is a hazard.

It sounds most likely.  I've CC'd this message to the devfs list, hopefully 
someone there will have some useful suggestions.

> Anyway, one more question, and probably not really for you, but
> /etc/raid/raidtab: should this contain devfs paths for the
> raiddev and device lines, or tarditional /dev/ devices? My
> understanding was to use traditional names, so the system can
> still be started without devfs, but I don't think the raidstart
> tool can handle this? Is this right?

I use all devfs paths.  But while in the change-over to devfs use old style 
paths.

One problem I have found is that if converting from a RAID non-devfs system 
to devfs with initrd then the initrd creation scripts will want to use 
non-devfs paths (which won't work).  There are two solutions.  One is to do 
the following before installation of the kernel image (and creation of 
initrd):
cd /dev
mkdir md
mv md1 md/1
The other is to create an initrd manually for the first boot of devfs.

-- 
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/     Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/       Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/     My home page

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>