Bug 2188830
Summary: | lvm resize in anaconda fails with lvm 2.03.21: "The LV must be active to safely reduce" | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Adam Williamson <awilliam> |
Component: | libblockdev | Assignee: | Vojtech Trefny <vtrefny> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | agk, anprice, bmarzins, bmr, cfeist, heinzm, kzak, lvm-team, mcsontos, msnitzer, prajnoha, tbzatek, v.podzimek+fedora, vtrefny, zkabelac |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | openqa | ||
Fixed In Version: | libblockdev-2.28-6.fc39 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2023-05-19 13:04:24 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Adam Williamson
2023-04-22 17:58:35 UTC
CCing vtrefny for the anaconda/blivet side of this. This is a new feature in LVM -- inactive LVs cannot be resized to prevent people accidentally shrinking inactive LVs with XFS and destroying their data in the process. This is not an issue in the installer, blivet takes care of resizing the filesystem first when needed/applicable. We have a fix for this in upstream, I need to backport it to Fedora. I am not sure why this didn't show in openQA before, the feature should be present in LVM 2.03.19 which was build in rawhide 2 months ago. Any news on that backport? This is still failing every day. I am sorry, I completely forgot about this. I built a new version of libblockdev for rawhide with the patch included, hopefully it will fix this issue. The 'install_resize_lvm' job passed with the latest rawhide build[1] so I am closign this as fixed. Sorry again for taking that long. [1] https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1944370 Yeah, I think we're good, thanks. The blivet test is actually a better reproducer - the regular custom partitioning one only failed *sometimes* on this, for some reason, the blivet one seemed to fail every time. But both passed today, so looks good. thanks! |