Not at all. That was the point of me entire email, that the LVM code
should handle these types of shuffles of space and simply use md modules
as the underlying mapper technology. Then, you go to one place to both
specify how things are laid out and what mapping is used in those laid out
spaces. Basically, I'm saying how I think things *should* be, and you're
telling me how they *are*. I know this, and I'm saying how things *are*
is wrong. There *should* be no md superblocks, there should only be dm
superblocks on LVM physical devices and those DM superblocks should
include the data needed to fire up the proper md module on the proper
physical extents based upon what mapper technology is specified in the
DM superblock and what layout is specified in the DM superblock. In my
opinion, the existence of both an MD and DM driver is wrong because they
are inherently two sides of the same coin, logical device mapping support,
with one being better at putting physical disks into intelligent arrays
and one being better at mapping different logical volumes onto one or more
physical volume groups.
-- Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com> 919-754-3700 x44233 Red Hat, Inc. 1801 Varsity Dr. Raleigh, NC 27606 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/