On 02/17/2011 03:57 PM, Phillip Susi wrote: > On 2/17/2011 2:29 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> /dev/mapper contains the names of the device-mapper devices >> themselves; for those I don't have any preference. >> kpartx as called from udev is using the '-part' suffix here, too. > > Right; it needs to not do that. Everyone needs to use the same naming > scheme. When you change naming schemes, you get duplicate devices. If > dmraid creates them with 'p' and then udev runs kpartx and tells it to > use '-part', then you get two partition devices, which will cause all > kinds of hell. > Which is why you should call 'dmraid' with '-p' to avoid having it creating partitions. We'll be getting another event via udev, which then trigger kpartx to create the partitons there. > Is there any harm done by adding the 'p' even when the base name does > not end in a digit? Is there any good reason to? The main problem here is that each and everyone has their own preferred way of naming. Most tend to stick to the linux model (occasionally inserting a 'p'), some tend to use persistent device names, some tend to use device-mapper / LVM and do away with all partitions etc. So whichever way you proceed, you should avoid using a naming scheme which resembles the linux one. Otherwise inevitably someone doesn't get it and starts complaining, one way of the other. Which was the reason why I chose the '-part' naming scheme; this way it's pretty obvious that a new naming scheme is used. So any objections for it not being compliant to the linux naming scheme are immediately voided. Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
