On 01/21/2010 03:03 PM, David Lehman wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-01-21 at 14:43 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
>> On 01/21/2010 01:47 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
>>> On 01/20/2010 07:31 PM, David Lehman wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2010-01-20 at 19:03 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
>>>>> Revamp this since multipath is now writing our rules for us.
>>>>>
>>>>> Use device.serial/device.vendor/device.model where appropriate, and
>>>>> don't give the device a braindead mode. Also change /when/ we write the
>>>>> files out.
>>>>> ---
>>>>> storage/__init__.py | 11 +
>>>>> storage/devicelibs/mpath.py | 517 +++----------------------------------------
>>>>> storage/devices.py | 10 +-
>>>>> storage/devicetree.py | 27 ++-
>>>>> 4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 500 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/storage/devicetree.py b/storage/devicetree.py
>>>>> index 4356ca5..5fa68f6 100644
>>>>> --- a/storage/devicetree.py
>>>>> +++ b/storage/devicetree.py
>>>>> @@ -1912,10 +1919,24 @@ class DeviceTree(object):
>>>>>
>>>>> # Having found all the disks, we can now find all the multipaths built
>>>>> # upon them.
>>>>> - for mp in self.__multipaths.values():
>>>>> + whitelist = []
>>>>> + mpaths = self.__multipaths.values()
>>>>> + mpaths.sort(key=lambda d: d.name)
>>>>> + for mp in mpaths:
>>>>> log.info("adding mpath device %s" % mp.name)
>>>>> mp.setup()
>>>>> + whitelist.append(mp.name)
>>>>> + for p in mp.parents:
>>>>> + self.addIgnoredDisk(p)
>>>>
>>>> I thought it was decided today that mpath member disks should not be
>>>> ignored, since that's the case for biosraid member disks.
>>>
>>> Was it? I thought we decided that multipath members shouldn't be
>>> automatically filtered out by isIgnored(), since that prevents them from
>>> being recognized in addUdevDevice(), which we need to process them. But
>>> once we've done that, /manually/ ignoring them doesn't have the same
>>> problem.
>
> Why would we ignore them? We no longer blindly assume that everything
> resembling a disk has a disklabel, so there's no reason to pretend that
> biosraid/mpath member disks aren't there when they are.
Well, here I was just wrong (notice the patch already posted that takes
that line out... ;) ).
The other place I'm calling AddIgnoredDisks(parent), the thought was to
remove them from the UI in the partitioning screen. Doesn't work though,
so I should figure out something else there as well.
--
Peter
What we need is either less corruption, or more chances to
participate in it.
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
