and the multipath delete code is in udev so if you search udev then the code doing it should be in there. And I would think anyone else's partition mapping deletes would be in there. On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 11:22 AM Roger Heflin <rogerheflin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > That looks like multipath is blacklisted. > > you might to a lsinitrd | grep -i multipath and make sure it is not in > the initrd with a config file. > > multipath is the only service I have seen that actually deletes > partition mappings, but it is possible that some of the other dm* > stuff might (dm-raid maybe?).. > > On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 6:35 AM GianPiero Puccioni > <gianpiero.puccioni@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 3/3/21 12:39 PM, Roger Heflin wrote: > > > Blacklist the wwwid in multipath.conf and/or blacklist the disk type > > > in multipath. > > > > > > And/or whitelist the disks you want multipath to manage. > > > > > > If all of your disks have 2 paths and are expected to have 2 paths > > > then you can set file_multipaths to only manage devices with 2 paths, > > > but to make multipath work right in the one path case the disks need > > > to be listed in the bindings file. > > > > > I am not sure I understand any of this, as shown before I have only 1 disk with > > sda 8:0 0 931.5G 0 disk > > ├─sda1 8:1 0 1G 0 part > > └─sda2 8:2 0 930.5G 0 part > > ├─fedora_node06-root 253:0 0 50G 0 lvm / > > ├─fedora_node06-swap 253:1 0 4G 0 lvm [SWAP] > > └─fedora_node06-home 253:2 0 876.5G 0 lvm /home > > > > So I think that sda2 is managed by multipath but sda1 is not. > > I do not have a multipath.conf and "multipath -t" writes A LOT of stuff, while > > "multipath show config" gives: > > Mar 03 13:29:38 | /etc/multipath.conf does not exist, blacklisting all devices. > > Mar 03 13:29:38 | You can run "/sbin/mpathconf --enable" to create > > Mar 03 13:29:38 | /etc/multipath.conf. See man mpathconf(8) for more details > > Mar 03 13:29:38 | DM multipath kernel driver not loaded > > > > Not sure what this means or what is the proper way to do what you said. > > > > > The short term is add ,nofail to the options on the mount then it will > > > always boot up but may not mount /boot. But make sure /boot is > > > mounted when doing the things mentioned below. > > > > > > The bios finds the data on /boot and puts what is needed to boot into > > > memory, once that is done you really only need /boot on the machine if > > > you are updating kernels/changing grub options/rebuilding initrds. > > > > > Yes that was why I did not things stay the way they are, after all it works. > > One possibility could be to use an rc.local (the systemd equivalent or a proper > > service) to run "partprobe" and "mount" at start, would this work? > > > > GiP > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 4:19 AM GianPiero Puccioni > > > <gianpiero.puccioni@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> > > >> On 3/2/21 10:24 PM, Jorge Fábregas wrote: > > >>> On 3/2/21 5:04 PM, GianPiero Puccioni wrote: > > >>>> so it is there and seen but why the block device is not created? Copying > > >>>> the content of (sda1)boot into /boot and reinstalling grub could probably > > >>>> work but how? > > >>> > > >>> Hi GianPiero, > > >>> > > >>> This is strange. I don't know why there's no device file for the first > > >>> partition (/dev/sda1). Can you try "partprobe /dev/sda" to see if it creates > > >>> the file? > > >> > > >> Thanks all for the help > > >> > > >> I didn't know this command (never neded it..) but yes, it did create the file > > >> now I have > > >> # ls /dev/sd* > > >> /dev/sda /dev/sda1 /dev/sda2 > > >> > > >> and "blkid" has > > >> /dev/sda1: UUID="f365a320-f3d7-4c07-8bfb-f0164b9ce8c0" BLOCK_SIZE="4096" > > >> TYPE="xfs" PARTUUID="6ccdd7fd-01" > > >> that wasn't there before. > > >> > > >>> Are you sure /dev/sda1 was used for /boot ? > > >> I think so(it was the partion marked as bootable), and now that I can mount it I > > >> can see that all the usal /boot stuff is there. > > >> Can you > > >>> show the output of "cat /proc/cmdline"? > > >>> > > >> # cat /proc/cmdline > > >> BOOT_IMAGE=(hd0,msdos1)/vmlinuz-5.10.19-200.fc33.x86_64 > > >> root=/dev/mapper/fedora_node06-root ro resume=/dev/mapper/fedora_node06-swap > > >> rd.lvm.lv=fedora_node06/root rd.lvm.lv=fedora_node06/swap rhgb quiet > > >> > > >> As Roger said the problem seems to be multipath but > > >> if there is no fix to the fact that sda1 disappeared (any idea?) > > >> I suppose the solution now could be to copy all the stuff from sda1 in /boot and > > >> recreate grub in sda ignoring sda1. Unless it needs a separate /boot, I think > > >> UEFI is disabled but I am not sure, or for the weird RAID stuff. > > >> > > >> As I said I am doing all this remotely so I have to be careful not to break the > > >> boot. > > >> > > >> Thanks again. > > >> > > >> GiP > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > >> To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > >> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > > >> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > >> List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > >> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > > > _______________________________________________ > > > users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > > > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > > > > > > > > > -- > > GianPiero Puccioni |Istituto dei Sistemi Complessi-CNR > > gianpiero.puccioni@xxxxxxxxxx |Via Madonna del Piano, 10 > > T:+39 0555226682 |50019 Sesto F. (Firenze) ITALY > > _______________________________________________ > > users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
