[lkml]   [2010]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Linux mdadm superblock question.
On Sat, 13 Feb 2010, Michael Evans wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
> <> wrote:
>>> 0.90 has a very bad problem, which is that it is hard to distinguish
>>> between a RAID partition at the end of volume and a full RAID device.
>>> This is because 0.90 doesn't actually tell you the start of the device.
>>> Then, of course, there are a lot of limitations on size, number of
>>> devices, and so on in 0.90.
>> but it is the only format supporting autodetection.
>> So - when will autodetection be introduced with 1.X? And if not, why not?
>> All I found was 'autodetection might be troublesome' and nothing else.
>>  But dealing with initrds is troublesome too. Pure evil even.
>> Gl?ck Auf,
>> Volker
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
>> the body of a message to
>> More majordomo info at
> I remember hearing that 1.x had /no/ plans for kernel level
> auto-detection ever. That can be accomplished in early-userspace
> leaving the code in the kernel much less complex, and therefore far
> more reliable.
> In other words, 'auto-detection' for 1.x format devices is using an
> initrd/initramfs.

hmm, I've used 1.x formats without an initrd/initramfs (and without any
conifg file on the server) and have had no problem with them being
discovered. I haven't tried to use one for a boot/root device, so that may
be the difference.

David Lang
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-02-14 08:25    [W:0.113 / U:8.300 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site