Bug 1318581
Summary: | option "-T" for multipath(8) need to be documented in man page | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Reporter: | masanari iida <masanari.iida> |
Component: | device-mapper-multipath | Assignee: | Ben Marzinski <bmarzins> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Lin Li <lilin> |
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 7.2 | CC: | agk, bmarzins, heinzm, lilin, msnitzer, prajnoha |
Target Milestone: | rc | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | device-mapper-multipath-0.4.9-89.el7 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: |
documentation fix: not doc text necessary
|
Story Points: | --- |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2016-11-04 08:18:55 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
masanari iida
2016-03-17 09:48:18 UTC
I've added documentation for the -T option to the man page. Reproduced on device-mapper-multipath-0.4.9-85.el7.x86_64 [root@storageqe-54 ~]# man multipath "-T" not documented. [root@storageqe-54 ~]# multipath -h -T tm:val check if tm matches the multipathd timestamp. If so val is whether or not the device is a path in a multipath device Verified on device-mapper-multipath-0.4.9-89.el7 [root@storageqe-54 ~]# man multipath -T tm:valid check if tm matches the multipathd configuration timestamp value from /run/multipathd/timestamp If so, return success if valid is 1. Otherwise, return failure. If the timestamp doesn't match continue with multipath execution. This option is designed to be used with -c by the udev rules. [root@storageqe-54 ~]# multipath -h -T tm:val check if tm matches the multipathd timestamp. If so val is whether or not the device is a path in a multipath device Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016-2536.html |