On Sat, Dec 03, 2022 at 01:02:41AM +0100, Martin Wilck wrote: > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 18:00 -0600, Roger Heflin wrote: > > One of the Enterprise 7 variants, Claims "0.4.9" multipath but > > appears to have a number of recent features backported, so some > > frankensteined version. > > > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 5:50 PM Martin Wilck <mwilck@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 17:44 -0600, Roger Heflin wrote: > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > The older distribution I checked has this for -T > > > > -T tm:valid > > > > check if tm matches the multipathd configuration > > > > timestamp value from /run/multipathd/timestamp If so, return > > > > success > > > > if valid is 1. Otherwise, return failure. If the timestamp > > > > doesn't > > > > match continue with multipath execution. This option is designed > > > > to > > > > be used with -c by the udev rules. > > > > > > Strange, I can't find this anywhere in the sources I know. > > > What distro is this? "multipath -T" in the sense I described has > > > existed since 0.7.7, so for more than 4 years. > > > > > > Martin > > > > > Funny, Ben never told me there was a conflicting option name in RHEL. > I guess it's too late now, as I said, the upstream option has existed > for 4 years. This was a fix for a RHEL specific systemd issue, that's long since been resolved in more up to date versions of RHEL. RHEL-8 and RHEL-9 have the same code as upstream for the -T option. -Ben > > Martin -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
