[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM 1.0.7, kernel 2.4.21 and snapshots over ext3 filesystem



C R Ritson C.R.Ritson-at-newcastle.ac.uk |LVM Mailinglist linux-lvm/Allow| wrote 45 lines:

> > My bet is that you first patched the kernel for VFS-lock and
> > *then* patched the kernel for LVM.  This undoes (parts of)
> > the VFS-lock.  The reason is as follows:

> That is strange - my exprience with kernel 2.4.20 and LVM 1.0.7 was as
> follows:

> Attempting to apply the VFS-lock patch AFTER the LVM generated patch
> gives me an un-compilable tree with with unresolved reverences to
> fsync_dev_lockfs and unlockfs.

I have compiled quite a few kernels exactly after my cheatsheet
(from at least 2.4.21-rc1 up to my currently running 2.4.21-lvm)
and it works.  At times I may have to hand-patch because of
trivial changes to get the VFS-lock patch in, but ... that's it.

> On one test machine I am running a 2.4.20 kernel in which the VFS-lock
> patch was applied BEFORE the LVM patch. Here, I am taking a snapshot at

> Would Heinz care to comment on these two apparently conflicting results?

It MIGHT be that LVM 1.0.7 is in sync (or at least not damaging)
to the VFS-lock patch for 2.4.20.  I *have* had problems in the
past (I tried VFS-lock and the LVM and it failed), but I cannot
vouch that they are there for kernel 2.4.20/LVM 1.0.7.

-Wolfgang



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]