From: Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>
To: Peter Rajnoha <prajnoha@redhat.com>,
Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac@redhat.com>,
Benjamin Marzinski <bmarzins@redhat.com>,
David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-lvm@lists.linux.dev, dm-devel@lists.linux.dev,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/7] dm udev rules: don't export and save DM_SUSPENDED
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2024 09:47:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1fb575095f094244b6b35e7da79af81728014588.camel@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6e36545a-42e3-4bfc-945c-77d07b6ab484@redhat.com>
On Tue, 2024-03-05 at 09:19 +0100, Peter Rajnoha wrote:
> On 3/4/24 17:21, Martin Wilck wrote:
> >
> > My personal take on this is that 11-dm-mpath.rules actually belongs
> > to
> > device-mapper (being executed before 13-dm-disk.rules), even though
> > it's not maintained in the lvm2 repository. As such, it should be
> > allowed to access dm-internal flags like DM_SUSPENDED.
> > Not that's not a problem with this patch; the multipath rules can
> > just
> > access .DM_SUSPENDED instead of DM_SUSPENDED.
>
> Within DM and DM-subsystem rules, it's OK to use DM_SUSPENDED, if
> needed.
I gather that you agree that 11-dm-mpath.rules represents a "DM
subsystem" rule set?
>
> We should just hide it from all the "other" rules so they don't need
> to
> bother. For them (right now), it's either "usable" or "unusable"
> device
> for whatever reason behind and we (DM+DM-subystem) should reimport
> whatever is needed for the state/set of variables that others may
> use,
> to stay sane. Of course, we can do this only for the state that we
> own.
>
> As we discussed before, this can be extended to making a difference
> among "usable", "temporarily unusable" (so reimport the
> state/variables
> needed) and "completely unusable" state for others.
Yeah, but that's future work, and I doubt that it makes sense to invest
much effort into it. I definitely wouldn't want to tie this to the
current patch set.
As mentioned previously, it might make sense to introduce a flag that
expresses something like "you can access this device, but you don't
need to" (DISK_RO={0,1} case, for example). But then, we already have
DM_ACTIVATION to express the opposite ("you must have a look at this
device, its properties have changed"). I wonder if you consider
DM_ACTIVATION a dm-internal property?
Thanks
Martin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-05 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-01 22:40 [RFC PATCH 0/7] device mapper udev rules rework Martin Wilck
2024-03-01 22:40 ` [RFC PATCH 1/7] 13-dm-disk.rules: import ID_FS_TYPE Martin Wilck
2024-03-04 10:37 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-04 15:17 ` Martin Wilck
2024-03-04 15:44 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-01 22:40 ` [RFC PATCH 2/7] 10-dm.rules: don't deactivate devices for DISK_RO=1 Martin Wilck
2024-03-04 10:48 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-04 11:19 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-04 11:27 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-04 15:21 ` Martin Wilck
2024-03-04 16:09 ` Martin Wilck
2024-03-05 8:09 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-01 22:40 ` [RFC PATCH 3/7] 10-dm-rules: don't restore DM_UDEV_DISABLE_OTHER_RULES_FLAG from db Martin Wilck
2024-03-04 10:49 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-01 22:40 ` [RFC PATCH 4/7] 11-dm-lvm.rules: " Martin Wilck
2024-03-04 10:51 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-01 22:40 ` [RFC PATCH 5/7] dm udev rules: don't export and save DM_SUSPENDED Martin Wilck
2024-03-04 11:00 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-04 16:21 ` Martin Wilck
2024-03-05 8:19 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-05 8:47 ` Martin Wilck [this message]
2024-03-05 9:10 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-05 9:28 ` Martin Wilck
2024-03-01 22:40 ` [RFC PATCH 6/7] dm udev rules: don't export and save DM_NOSCAN Martin Wilck
2024-03-04 11:03 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-01 22:40 ` [RFC PATCH 7/7] 10-dm.rules: bump DM_UDEV_RULES_VSN to 3 Martin Wilck
2024-03-04 11:09 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-04 16:46 ` Martin Wilck
2024-03-05 8:26 ` Peter Rajnoha
2024-03-05 9:04 ` Martin Wilck
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1fb575095f094244b6b35e7da79af81728014588.camel@suse.com \
--to=mwilck@suse.com \
--cc=bmarzins@redhat.com \
--cc=dm-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=linux-lvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=prajnoha@redhat.com \
--cc=teigland@redhat.com \
--cc=zkabelac@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).