On 10/22/2012 07:59 PM, WANG Chao wrote:
Current dmraid/lvm/mdraid activation logic looks like a mess.
Only activate dmraid/lvm/mdraid under any of the following conditions:
1. User specify rd.dm.uuid/rd.md.uuid/rd.lvm.{vg,lv} on the cmdline.
2. rd.dm/rd.md/rd.lvm != 0 and rd.auto=1
On the contrary, disable activation when !(cond 1 or cond 2).
Signed-off-by: WANG Chao <chaowang@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
modules.d/90dmraid/parse-dm.sh | 13 +++++--------
modules.d/90lvm/parse-lvm.sh | 5 +++--
modules.d/90mdraid/parse-md.sh | 3 ++-
3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/modules.d/90dmraid/parse-dm.sh b/modules.d/90dmraid/parse-dm.sh
index 76dfb5d..4bc903c 100755
--- a/modules.d/90dmraid/parse-dm.sh
+++ b/modules.d/90dmraid/parse-dm.sh
@@ -2,8 +2,11 @@
# -*- mode: shell-script; indent-tabs-mode: nil; sh-basic-offset: 4; -*-
# ex: ts=8 sw=4 sts=4 et filetype=sh
# nodmraid for anaconda / rc.sysinit compatibility
-if ! getargbool 1 rd.dm -d -n rd_NO_DM || getarg "rd.dm=0" -d nodmraid; then
- info "rd.dm=0: removing DM RAID activation"
+
+DM_RAIDS=$(getargs rd.dm.uuid -d rd_DM_UUID=)
+
+if [ -z "$DM_RAIDS" ] && \
+ (! getargbool 0 rd.auto || ! getargbool 1 rd.dm -d -n rd_NO_DM -d -n nodmraid); then
udevproperty rd_NO_DM=1
fi
@@ -16,9 +19,3 @@ if ! command -v mdadm >/dev/null || ! getargbool 1 rd.md.ddf -n rd_NO_MDDDF -n
info "rd.md.ddf=0: no MD RAID for SNIA ddf raids"
udevproperty rd_NO_MDDDF=1
fi
-
-DM_RAIDS=$(getargs rd.dm.uuid -d rd_DM_UUID=)
-
-if [ -z "$DM_RAIDS" ] && ! getargbool 0 rd.auto; then
- udevproperty rd_NO_DM=1
-fi
diff --git a/modules.d/90lvm/parse-lvm.sh b/modules.d/90lvm/parse-lvm.sh
index 3e6b371..655d6c6 100755
--- a/modules.d/90lvm/parse-lvm.sh
+++ b/modules.d/90lvm/parse-lvm.sh
@@ -1,14 +1,15 @@
#!/bin/sh
# -*- mode: shell-script; indent-tabs-mode: nil; sh-basic-offset: 4; -*-
# ex: ts=8 sw=4 sts=4 et filetype=sh
+
if [ -e /etc/lvm/lvm.conf ] && ! getargbool 1 rd.lvm.conf -d -n rd_NO_LVMCONF; then
rm -f /etc/lvm/lvm.conf
fi
LV_DEVS="$(getargs rd.lvm.vg -d rd_LVM_VG=) $(getargs rd.lvm.lv -d rd_LVM_LV=)"
-if ! getargbool 1 rd.lvm -d -n rd_NO_LVM \
- || ( [ -z "$LV_DEVS" ] && ! getargbool 0 rd.auto ); then
+if [ -z "$LV_DEVS" ] && \
+ (! getargbool 0 rd.auto || ! getargbool 1 rd.lvm -d -n rd_NO_LVM ); then
info "rd.lvm=0: removing LVM activation"
rm -f /etc/udev/rules.d/64-lvm*.rules
else
diff --git a/modules.d/90mdraid/parse-md.sh b/modules.d/90mdraid/parse-md.sh
index 2de435b..80a19bc 100755
--- a/modules.d/90mdraid/parse-md.sh
+++ b/modules.d/90mdraid/parse-md.sh
@@ -4,7 +4,8 @@
MD_UUID=$(getargs rd.md.uuid -d rd_MD_UUID=)
-if ( ! [ -n "$MD_UUID" ] && ! getargbool 0 rd.auto ) || ! getargbool 1 rd.md -d -n rd_NO_MD; then
+if [ -z "$MD_UUID" ] && \
+ (! getargbool 0 rd.auto || ! getargbool 1 rd.md -d -n rd_NO_MD); then
info "rd.md=0: removing MD RAID activation"
udevproperty rd_NO_MD=1
else
Hi, Harald
What do you think of this patch?
And also kdump need this patch. cc4037d explains why we need override
rd.dm/rd.md if rd.dm.uuid/rd.md.uuid is provided. And e064127 which
introduces rd.auto breaks the rules.
Thanks,
WANG Chao
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe initramfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
