Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932469AbWBGQre (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2006 11:47:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932464AbWBGQrd (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2006 11:47:33 -0500 Received: from percy.comedia.it ([212.97.59.71]:63715 "EHLO percy.comedia.it") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932455AbWBGQrc (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2006 11:47:32 -0500 Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 17:47:30 +0100 From: Luca Berra To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Neil Brown , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, klibc list , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [klibc] Re: Exporting which partitions to md-configure Message-ID: <20060207164730.GA12480@percy.comedia.it> Mail-Followup-To: "H. Peter Anvin" , Neil Brown , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, klibc list , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <43DEB4B8.5040607@zytor.com> <17374.47368.715991.422607@cse.unsw.edu.au> <43DEC095.2090507@zytor.com> <17374.50399.1898.458649@cse.unsw.edu.au> <43DEC5DC.1030709@zytor.com> <17382.43646.567406.987585@cse.unsw.edu.au> <43E80A5A.5040002@zytor.com> <20060207104311.GD22221@percy.comedia.it> <43E8C0F3.5080205@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <43E8C0F3.5080205@zytor.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1976 Lines: 54 On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 07:46:59AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >Luca Berra wrote: >> >>I don't like using partition type as a qualifier, there is people who do >>not wish to partition their drives, there are systems not supporting >>msdos like partitions, heck even m$ is migrating away from those. >> > >That's why we're talking about non-msdos partitioning schemes. this still leaves whole disks >>If the user wants to reutilize a device that was previously a member of >>an md array he/she should use mdadm --zero-superblock to remove the >>superblock. >>I see no point in having a system that tries to compensate for users not >>following correct procedures. sorry. > >You don't? That surprises me... making it harder for the user to have >accidental data loss sounds like a very good thing to me. making it harder for the user is a good thing, but please not at the expense of usability the only way i see a user can have data loss is if - a md array is stopped - two different filesystems are created on the component devices - these filesystems are filled with data, but not to the point of damaging the superblock - then the array is started again. if only one device is removed using mdadm the event counter would prevent the array from being assembled again. there are a lot of easier ways for shooting yourself in the feet :) if we really want to be paranoid we should modify mkXXXfs to refuse creating a filesystem if the device has an md superblock on it. (lvm2 tools are already able to ignore devices with md superblocks on them, no clue about EVMS) L. -- Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/