From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:54:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:54:30 -0500 Received: from host194.steeleye.com ([216.33.1.194]:56071 "EHLO pogo.mtv1.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:54:23 -0500 Message-Id: <200101161653.f0GGrl101735@aslan.sc.steeleye.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Venkatesh Ramamurthy cc: "'arjan@fenrus.demon.nl'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "'linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org'" Subject: Re: Linux not adhering to BIOS Drive boot order? In-Reply-To: Message from Venkatesh Ramamurthy of "Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:31:25 EST." <1355693A51C0D211B55A00105ACCFE64E9518F@ATL_MS1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:53:47 -0500 From: Eddie Williams Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Why is this a SCSI ML problem? The problem is that the OS can't figure out where to mount root from. Sounds like an OS problem. I think the file system label is the leading candidate to solve this. One really does not care if the root disk is called /dev/sda or /dev/fred. All one cares is that you can boot your system and the right disks are mounted. What I have seen so far with the fs label this either does solve this today or it can solve this. I notice today on some systems the entries in /etc/fstab already are "deviceless" in that it does not have the disk/partition but simply the disk label. Can lilo use a label for the root disk also? I have not looked into that yet. If it does not can it? When I noticed the use of the label in /etc/fstab my first thought was "alright, someone is solving this problem." I have not taken the time - not a burning issue with me right now - to see if this is all done yet though. Keep in mind that the example where /dev/sda is where root lies is that "easy" case. The hard case is what happens if someone installs on /dev/sdg. Now they boot up with a disk array turned off. Is the mid-layer going to figure out that what is now /dev/sda suppose to be /dev/sdg? Or they install to /dev/sdb and /dev/sda goes bad so they pull it out? Eddie > > In article <1355693A51C0D211B55A00105ACCFE64E9518C@ATL_MS1> you wrote: > > > > > we need some kind of signature being written in the drive, which the > > kernel > > > will use for determining the boot drive and later re-order drives, if > > > required. > > > > Like the ext2 labels? (man e2label) > [Venkatesh Ramamurthy] This re-ordering of the scsi drives should > be done by SCSI ML , so is incorporating ext2 fs data structure knowledge on > the SCSI ML a good idea?. > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/