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

[lvm-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/6] Add --dataalignmentoffset to pvcreate to pad aligned data area

The difficulty is that lots of code paths converge here.
Cases where there are pre-existing mdas that must be preserved.
Cases where there is a pre-existing pe_start that must be preserved.
Cases which back up the existing setting of pe_start and restore
it after returning - the mdas had better not have moved to overlap.
pe_start is kept in two places on disk - inside the PV header
(as the data area location) and inside the VG metadata if the PV
belongs to a VG.  The latter could mask the former.

E.g. Did you test pvcreate with some new offset; add to VG; vgcfgrestore
from a backup that did not have an offset when it was created; vgremove;
and see whether the original offset got preserved?
Then throw a pvchange --uuid into the sequence just before the vgremove.
And test conversion from/to lvm1 format.

These are examples of code paths touched by the patch which should all be

Alternatively go for a rule-based patch ("wherever it currently does X now also
do Y") that avoids the need to audit and test all those code paths thoroughly.

Or if you want to move the place pe_start is set and you have audited/tested
the code, do that as a separate patch prior to incorporating the new setting.

Also, we need a crisper definition of this new setting and how it interacts
with the existing alignment code (page size, data_alignment, pe_align,
md_chunk_alignment etc.) 
What's the behaviour if someone gives a value much larger than the
calculated pe_align?
Are we sure it's never applied twice e.g. with multiple invocations
of the code (in any combination of the cases I mentioned above) pe_start
doesn't grow bigger and bigger?  
Should the first mda get extended to fill up any free space prior to pe_start?


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