https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=371657 User deanjo@sasktel.net added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=371657#c37 --- Comment #37 from Dean Hilkewich <deanjo@sasktel.net> 2008-11-17 17:55:50 MST --- (In reply to comment #36 from Kay Sievers)
(In reply to comment #35 from Dean Hilkewich)
So despite this being around forever as a bug @ a P1 and now being marked as a P4 that this bug will not be fixed for 11.1?
I do not think that the general problem causing this "bug" will be fixed.
The problem is that the kernel parses partitions and creates block devices without knowing about the context or the metadata of the volume. All of these partitions should not exist in the first place, because the disk is part of a raid setup. But the kernel does not know that, and creates completely invalid partitions.
There are two possible fixes, one would be to teach the kernel about all possible raid metadata, if the kernel wants to continue parsing partition tables. The other option would be to parse partitions only in userspace and not in the kernel. Both options are unlikely to happen _now_.
In the upstream kernel we made sure (it's merged, but still tested and not in a released version) that partitions point only to a valid storage area, which will prevent the "access beyond end of device" warning. But still, it's only a cosmetic change to the underlying problem.
We can port the upstream "cosmetic" fix to 11.1, if it survives the released upstream kernel (the former fix got removed because it broke some setups), but I do not see any "nice" fix to the general problem. The problem is known and exists since a while, without any good idea to fix it so far.
Your specific behavior, that your second array behaves differently from the first one, nobody has an idea why this could be, so unfortunately, for now, I'm not sure what we can expect to be fixed.
Well as I mentioned before in Comment 34, I believe we are barking up the wrong tree here. The partitioner is setting up the second arrays partition scheme different then the first. All errors disappear when the array is partitioned with another OS's partitioner. I have even verified this on Fedora and it creates the secondary raid set fine on it's own. While the primary set when creating the set does mark extended partition as a "f W95 Ext'd (LBA)" it does not do so for a secondary set in opensuse. It does however do it when partitioned in Fedora or windows. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.