| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 18:34:30 +0200 From: Helge Hafting <helgehaf@...el.hist.no> To: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de> Cc: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: let md auto-detect 128+ raid members, fix potential race condition On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 09:20:58AM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > > My first inclination is not to fix this problem. > > I consider md auto-detect to be a legacy feature. > I don't use it and I recommend that other people don't use it. > However I cannot justify removing it, so it stays there. > Having this limitation could be seen as a good motivation for some > more users to stop using it. > > Why not use auto-detect? [Arguments deleted] Well, if autodetection is removed, what is then the preferred way of booting off a raid-1 device? Kernel parameters? An initrd with mdadm just for this? Some people want to do even partition detection from initrd, in order to have a smaller kernel. We aren't there yet though. Autotetect is nice from an administrator viewpoint - compile it in and it "just works". The trouble when you connect an array from some other machine is to be expected, but that isn't exactly everyday stuff. Helge Hafting - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists