On 04/06/2010 06:06 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 04/06/2010 11:54 AM, Ales Kozumplik wrote:
>> On 03/30/2010 02:30 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> While doing what should be testing a simple iscsi related patch,
>>> I encountered the following issue:
>>>
>>> Take a system with a single disk, sda, which has a /boot on
>>> sda1 and a PV on sda2. This PV is the PV for the 1 PV VG:
>>> VolGroup, which contains LV's lv_swap, lv_root and lv_home.
>>>
>>> "Attach" an iscsi disk to this system, which becomes sdb,
>>> which has a /boot on sdb1 and a PV on sdb2. This PV is the PV
>>> for the 1 PV VG: VolGroup, which contains LV's lv_swap and
>>> lv_root.
>>>
>>> Notice that:
>>> 1) The 2 VG's have the same name
>>> 2) Only sda has a lv_home LV.
>>>
>>> Now in the filter UI select only disk sdb to install to, then
>>> the following may (depending on scanning order) happen:
>>>
>>> Assume sdb gets scanned first by devicetree.py:
>>> - when scanning sdb2, handleUdevLVMPVFormat() will
>>> call "lvm lvchange -ay" for all LV's in this VG
>>> (as seen by udev, more on that later).
>>> - at this point, sda has not been scanned yet, so
>>> isIgnored has not been called for sda2 yet, and thus
>>> lvm_cc_addFilterRejectRegexp("sda2") has not been called
>>> yet.
>>> - thus lvm lvchange sees both sda2 and sdb2, it complains
>>> that there are 2 identically named VG's and picks the one
>>> using the sda2 PV.
>>
>> Maybe we should stop the installation at this point and tell the user
>> that he named two VGs the same and needs to address this before
>> proceeding with the installation? Because otherwise we will need to do
>> too many changes for a corner case that only occurs infrequently. And we
>> still won't be completely happy with them.
>>
>
> That won't work, as there actually are no duplicate VG's when looking only
> at the devices the user selected in the filter UI, the problem is
> that lvm at this point does not honor what we've selected in the filter UI
> and what not. Which is caused by the way we build the ignore these devices
> cmdline argument for lvm.
Perhaps we should be generating an lvm.conf with a proper filter section for
this instead? It's not really an ideal solution :/
--
Peter
Teach a man to use food stamps, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to *forge*
food stamps, he'll eat for a lifetime.
-- Dossy
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
