[linux-lvm] LVM and RO device/partition(s

[lacsaP Patatetom]

Le mer. 22 mars 2023 à 15:11, Zdenek Kabelac
<zdenek.kabelac at gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> Dne 20. 03. 23 v 17:37 lacsaP Patatetom napsal(a):
> > hi,
> >
> > I come back to you with the memo mentioned :
> > https://github.com/patatetom/lvm-on-readonly-block-device
> > <https://github.com/patatetom/lvm-on-readonly-block-device>
> > I hope that it will allow you to better understand this problem of alteration
> > of the disk.
> >
> > as I mentioned, LVM should normally/theoretically not touch the disk as long
> > as it is read-only, but what bothers me the most is the fact that I can't
> > "catch up" by correcting the new 6.1.15 kernel as I did before.
> >
> > regards, lacsaP.
> >
> > Le lun. 20 mars 2023 à 15:15, lacsaP Patatetom <patatetom at gmail.com
>
> Hi
>
> So I'm possibly finally starting to understand your problem here.

:-)

>
> You are using your own patched kernel - where you were reverting
> a32e236eb93e62a0f692e79b7c3c9636689559b9  linux kernel patch.
>
> without likely understanding the consequences.

indeed, I did not go down in the meanders of LVM and Linux kernel, I
have neither the capacity nor the time :-(
my goal was/is to prevent any modification of a read-only configured
media and this little `return true;` was doing the job for LVM :-)

>
> With kernel 6.X there is commit bdb7d420c6f6d2618d4c907cd7742c3195c425e2
> modifying bio_check_ro() to return void  - so your 'reverting' patch
> is no longer usable the way it's been created.

yes.

>
>
>  From your github report it seems you are creating  'raid' across 3 sdb drives.

I don't do anything special at this level, it's my system (ArchLinux)
that takes care of it.
the "only" thing I introduce is the udev rule which allows to switch
devices/partitions to read-only as soon as they appear.

>
> So with normal kernel - it happens to be that  'dm' drives are allowed to
> bypass any 'read-only' protection set on a device.
>
> So when you actually creating raid LV on  loop0 & loop1 - deactivate, then you
> make loop0 & loop1  read-only, active raid LV - then you can easily call
> 'mkfs' and it will normally work.
>
> Raid device consist or  '_rimage' & '_rmeta' LV per leg - where _rmeta is
> metadata device updated with activation of raid LV.

I think indeed that only the metadatas are concerned by these
modifications but they are stored somewhere on a read-only disk and
theoretically should not be modified .

>
> So when your local 'revert' patch for 6.X kernel no longer works - there is no
> surprise that your  'sdbX' drives are being actually modified - since ATM  dm
> targets are allowed to bypass  read-only protection.
>
> Since the reason for the  'bypass' (snapshot read-only activation)  was fixed
> 5 years ago we should probably build some better way how to restore to
> 'read-only' protection - and allow to disable it only when user requests such
> behavior due to use of old user-space tooling.

that would be cool ;-)
I'm currently working around my problem with a specific configuration
of lvm.conf and the use of /dev/nbd in snapshot mode which allows an
apparent change without real change.

>
> Regards
>
> Zdenek
>

thank you for these exchanges and your work.
regards, lacsaP.