On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 13:01 -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote: > On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 05:55:09PM +0100, Martin Wilck wrote: > > DM_UDEV_DISABLE_OTHER_RULES_FLAG is handled by 10-dm.rules, which > > imports > > it from db if necessary. There is no need to do this again here. > > > > DM_NOSCAN may be already set from previous rules, e.g. if the > > device is > > suspended. Make sure we don't overwrite it. > > > > Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck <mwilck@xxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Benjamin Marzinski <bmarzins@xxxxxxxxxx> I just realize that the DM_NOSCAN part of the patch isn't wrong, but pointless. Unlike DM_UDEV_DISABLE_OTHER_RULES_FLAG, DM_NOSCAN is not set by earlier rules. Only in 11-dm-lvm.rules, but that doesn't touch multipath devices. I do think that our use of DM_NOSCAN is inconsistent with what the LVM rules do, but that's a different issue. Thanks, Martin
