[dm-devel] [PATCH v2 00/12] fixes for kpartx -d

[Christophe Varoqui]

The set is merged, thanks.

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Benjamin Marzinski <bmarzins at redhat.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 05:37:10PM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote:
>
> ACK for the set
>
> -Ben
>
> > Working on a bug report about kpartx not properly removing
> > partitions for loop devices, I realized a number of glitches
> > and improperly handled corner cases in the kpartx code for
> > deleting partitions. Some mappings are not deleted although
> > they should be, and others are deleted although that is clearly
> > wrong.
> >
> > This patch series fixes the issues I found. The series starts
> > with a test program demonstrating the problems. The program
> > succeeds only after all patches of this series are applied.
> >
> > Here is my summary of what I think how kpartx should behave:
> >
> >   1) kpartx should delete all mappings it created beforehand.
> >   2) kpartx should handle partitions on dm devices and other devices
> >      (e.g. loop devices) equally well.
> >   3) kpartx should only delete "partitions", which are single-target
> >      linear mappings into a block device. Other maps should not be
> touched.
> >   4) kpartx should only delete mappings it created itself beforehand.
> >      In particular, it shouldn't delete LVM LVs, even if they are fully
> >      contained in the block device at hand and thus look like partitions
> >      in the first place. (For historical compatibility reasons, allow
> >      such mappings to be deleted with the -f/--force flag).
> >   5) DM map names may be changed, thus kpartx shouldn't rely on them to
> >      check whether a mapping is a partition of a particular device. It is
> >      legal for a partition of /dev/loop0 to be named "loop0".
> >
> > One patch has an obvious libdevmapper equivalent and is therefore
> > included (08/12) although this series is otherwise focused only on
> kpartx.
> > Patch 04/12 would also have a libdevmapper equivalent, but I haven't
> > included it because it would conflict with Ben's previously posted
> > patch "libmultipath: fix partition detection".
> >
> > The patches are based on Christophe's tree; Christophe, if you prefer,
> > I can rebase them on top of Ben's late submissions.
> >
> > Feedback is welcome.
> >
> > Changes wrt v1:
> > - Test program (01/12): improved cleanup, and used "kpartx -s" rather
> than waiting.
> > - At Ben's suggestion, removed "no_partitions" support rather than
> fixing it.
> > - Previous 04/12 split into two patches (04+05/12), improving and
> separating
> >   out the part that would similarly apply to libmultipath (see above).
> > - New UUID format in patch 09/12 since the previous one wasn't
> well-received;
> >   the "-kpartx-" part was superfluous, as partition UUIDs start with
> "part%s-" anyway.
> > - Added the trivial fix 12/12.
> >
> > Martin Wilck (12):
> >   kpartx: test-kpartx: new unit test program
> >   kpartx: remove "no_partitions" support
> >   kpartx: remove is_loop_device
> >   kpartx: relax and improve UUID check in dm_compare_uuid
> >   kpartx: dm_remove_partmaps: support non-dm devices
> >   kpartx: dm_devn: return error for non-existent device
> >   kpartx: don't treat multi-linear mappings as partitions
> >   libmultipath: don't treat multi-linear mappings as partitions
> >   kpartx: use partition UUID for non-DM devices
> >   kpartx: use absolute path for regular files
> >   kpartx: find_loop_by_file: use sysfs
> >   kpartx: include sys/sysmacros.h
> >
> >  kpartx/devmapper.c       |  80 ++++++---------
> >  kpartx/devmapper.h       |   2 +-
> >  kpartx/kpartx.c          |  50 ++++++++--
> >  kpartx/lopart.c          |  75 ++++++--------
> >  kpartx/lopart.h          |   1 -
> >  kpartx/sysmacros.h       |   9 --
> >  kpartx/test-kpartx       | 254 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> +++++++++++++++++
> >  libmultipath/devmapper.c |  15 +--
> >  8 files changed, 371 insertions(+), 115 deletions(-)
> >  delete mode 100644 kpartx/sysmacros.h
> >  create mode 100755 kpartx/test-kpartx
> >
> > --
> > 2.12.2
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/attachments/20170518/f2c2542f/attachment.htm>