+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1141398 +++ I installed Fedora 21 Alpha TC6 (from Server DVD, I think) to an LVM-on-RAID setup created in custom partitioning: I picked two disks, went to custom part, let it create partitions for me with LVM, then set the properties of the VG to RAID-1. This worked fine. Then I booted Fedora 21 Alpha TC7 Workstation x86_64 live, and selected both disks and went to custom partitioning. The VG of the previous install is not visible at all; all I can see for existing OSes/volumes is the 500MiB ext4 /boot partition. I'll attach logs . I did test up/downgrading to blivet 0.61.1, but it doesn't help (the log is with that blivet, in fact). The relevant devices - fedora--server-root and fedora--server-swap - are present in /dev/mapper (yes, with the double dashes). --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-09-12 21:03:38 EDT --- Not an Alpha blocker as if I boot with just one disk or the other selected I can see the PV and delete it (and hence Alpha criterion "The installer must be able to complete an installation to a single disk using automatic partitioning." is satisfied). But proposing as a Beta blocker - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_21_Beta_Release_Criteria#Custom_partitioning : "Correctly interpret, and modify as described below, any disk with a valid ms-dos or gpt disk label and partition table containing ext4 partitions, LVM and/or btrfs volumes, and/or software RAID arrays at RAID levels 0, 1 and 5 containing ext4 partitions" --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-09-12 21:15:10 EDT --- --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-09-12 21:15:24 EDT --- --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-09-12 21:16:32 EDT --- --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-09-12 21:17:01 EDT --- --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-09-12 21:17:19 EDT --- --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-09-12 21:21:26 EDT --- # mdadm --detail /dev/md127 /dev/md127: Version : 1.2 Creation Time : Wed Sep 10 23:59:25 2014 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 15719424 (14.99 GiB 16.10 GB) Used Dev Size : 15719424 (14.99 GiB 16.10 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Intent Bitmap : Internal Update Time : Fri Sep 12 21:14:13 2014 State : clean Active Devices : 2 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 Name : localhost:pv00 (local to host localhost) UUID : dbc9631b:d5d77065:42c4a0f3:ae5a2870 Events : 152 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 252 2 0 active sync /dev/vda2 1 252 17 1 active sync /dev/vdb1 [root@localhost tmp]# lvdisplay -a --- Logical volume --- LV Path /dev/fedora-server/root LV Name root VG Name fedora-server LV UUID C70iud-55Tp-D8Le-NyIY-C0dZ-6kmx-FCW41P LV Write Access read/write LV Creation host, time localhost, 2014-09-10 23:59:27 -0400 LV Status available # open 0 LV Size 12.91 GiB Current LE 3304 Segments 1 Allocation inherit Read ahead sectors auto - currently set to 256 Block device 253:3 --- Logical volume --- LV Path /dev/fedora-server/swap LV Name swap VG Name fedora-server LV UUID cqgBko-Rpa5-kJ4T-z0EN-V0uu-CpB4-ocO7iI LV Write Access read/write LV Creation host, time localhost, 2014-09-10 23:59:33 -0400 LV Status available # open 2 LV Size 2.00 GiB Current LE 512 Segments 1 Allocation inherit Read ahead sectors auto - currently set to 256 Block device 253:4 [root@localhost tmp]# parted /dev/vda print Model: Virtio Block Device (virtblk) Disk /dev/vda: 21.5GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: msdos Disk Flags: Number Start End Size Type File system Flags 1 1049kB 525MB 524MB primary ext4 boot 2 525MB 16.6GB 16.1GB primary raid [root@localhost tmp]# parted /dev/vdb print Model: Virtio Block Device (virtblk) Disk /dev/vdb: 16.1GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: msdos Disk Flags: Number Start End Size Type File system Flags 1 1049kB 16.1GB 16.1GB primary raid --- Additional comment from David Lehman on 2014-09-19 13:27:17 EDT --- This is related to md UUIDs containing ':' instead of '-'. I know you've made some changes in this area -- do you think they could have caused this issue? I'm asking because this is a new problem and I don't think anything has changed in udev, lvm, or mdadm. --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-09-19 14:14:49 EDT --- Update: this affects live, but not netinst, something in live is screwing with things, presumably. Bug reproduced with RC1, let me know if there's anything I can provide. I note that on the RC1 boot, the systemd unit 'lvm2-pvscan@9:127.service' appears to fire during boot and do something: Sep 19 13:41:46 localhost lvm[728]: 2 logical volume(s) in volume group "fedora-server" now active then something more when anaconda starts up: Sep 19 13:56:20 localhost lvm[2220]: No PV label found on /dev/md127. Sep 19 13:56:23 localhost lvm[2355]: 2 logical volume(s) in volume group "fedora-server" now active The F20 Final live works, and the logs from that service are rather different. On boot: Sep 19 14:03:15 localhost systemd[1]: Starting LVM2 PV scan on device 9:127... Sep 19 14:03:15 localhost pvscan[717]: 2 logical volume(s) in volume group "fedora-server" now active Sep 19 14:03:15 localhost systemd[1]: Started LVM2 PV scan on device 9:127. which perhaps indicates the scan never finishes on F21? I don't believe there's a matching "Started" message for the "Starting", I'll go check again shortly. On F20, when anaconda starts up: Sep 19 14:11:13 localhost systemd[1]: Stopping LVM2 PV scan on device 9:127... Sep 19 14:11:13 localhost pvscan[2181]: Device 9:127 not found. Cleared from lvmetad cache. Sep 19 14:11:13 localhost systemd[1]: Stopped LVM2 PV scan on device 9:127. Sep 19 14:11:13 localhost systemd[1]: Starting LVM2 PV scan on device 9:127... Sep 19 14:11:13 localhost pvscan[2241]: 2 logical volume(s) in volume group "fedora-server" now active Sep 19 14:11:13 localhost systemd[1]: Started LVM2 PV scan on device 9:127. Not sure if this is relevant, but it looked interesting. --- Additional comment from mulhern on 2014-10-01 17:51:23 EDT --- We hope that these will all turn out to be dupes. --- Additional comment from mulhern on 2014-10-01 17:58:34 EDT --- Although in this case we can see that the array was actually found with name pv00. The problem is, instead, that the status is checked and the uuids are verified against each other and one is the wrong format so they turn out not equal and status is False. This should be fixed by the patch for the other bugs, since we don't just sanitize the results of mdadm methods, but also the results of udev methods. --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-10-03 13:29:51 EDT --- Discussed at 2014-10-03 blocker review meeting: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2014-10-03/f21-blocker-review.2014-10-03-15.58.log.txt . Accepted as a blocker per criteria cited in nomination. --- Additional comment from mulhern on 2014-10-06 12:37:45 EDT --- Same as bz#1147077 fix. --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-10-08 13:23:27 EDT --- Fix for this should be in 21 Beta TC3 (not TC2). --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-10-15 17:26:50 EDT --- Fix confirmed in TC3, and finally I can stop keeping that VM lying around! --- Additional comment from Adam Williamson (Red Hat) on 2014-10-15 17:27:49 EDT --- 0.61.4 is now pending stable push, so let's just close this out. --- Additional comment from Oleg Samarin on 2014-12-19 13:29:28 EST --- I have the same issues with Fedora 21 Live release. I have an intel imsm raid-1 and a standalone SSD. Both contain partitions that belong to LVM PV of two different VG. There is another Fedora installations on them. I want to install F21 into some existing LVM partitions. When I run "install to the hard disk", anaconda proposes me selection with two devices "Raid volume" and "OCZ SSD". I select both with "custom layout". On the next screen I can see the existing fedora installation with the logical volumes only on SSD. I can not see any volumes on top of Raid Volume neither in existing Fedora installation nor under "Unknown". Instead there is /dev/md126p2 marked as unknown partition with the filesystem of "LVM PV". --- Additional comment from Oleg Samarin on 2014-12-19 14:31:59 EST --- --- Additional comment from Oleg Samarin on 2014-12-19 14:32:45 EST --- --- Additional comment from David Shea on 2014-12-19 14:49:14 EST --- (In reply to Oleg Samarin from comment #17) > I can not see any volumes on top of Raid Volume neither in existing Fedora > installation nor under "Unknown". Instead there is /dev/md126p2 marked as > unknown partition with the filesystem of "LVM PV". I looks like the raid contains an unformatted LVM PV partition 14:07:18,962 WARN blivet: PV md126p2 has no vg_name 14:07:18,962 WARN blivet: PV md126p2 has no vg_uuid 14:07:18,962 WARN blivet: PV md126p2 has no pe_start If there is a volume group on it, even a partial volume group, we should have gotten back some information about it from udev. --- Additional comment from Oleg Samarin on 2014-12-20 10:54:31 EST --- But lvm recognises this partition successfully. How can I debug this with working system without running anaconda? --- Additional comment from mulhern on 2014-12-22 07:57:45 EST --- Hi! When you are running anaconda and you get to the screen you describe in comment 17, you can try switching to a terminal and running the pvs command, like: pvs --unit=k --nosuffix --nameprefixes --unquoted --noheadings -opv_name,pv_uuid,pe_start,vg_name,vg_uuid,vg_size,vg_free,vg_extent_size,vg_extent_count,vg_free_count,pv_count This is the precise command blivet uses to gather information about the pvs on any visible device. Please report the result. Please also run the same command with the additional flag --all and report that result as well. This will allow us to discover what information pvs is reporting for the pv at that time. Another helpful thing to do is to include all logs. Especially useful in this context would be to have included program.log, which would tells us more about pvs output than is available from storage.log. --- Additional comment from Oleg Samarin on 2014-12-22 15:05:32 EST --- Today I've made more research. I need to start anaconda two times for obtaining an installer screen. Anaconda does nothing visible at the first start. But something happens at this time: before: lvm has two PVs: md126p2 and sdc2 after: lvm has another PVs: sdb2 and sdc2 (the md raid consists of two disks sda and sdb). So blivet indicates correctly at the second dime that md126p2 is no more PV. The remaining question is what and why does anaconda for lvm to use sdb instead of md126p2? --- Additional comment from Oleg Samarin on 2014-12-22 15:06:48 EST --- --- Additional comment from Oleg Samarin on 2014-12-22 15:09:20 EST --- --- Additional comment from Oleg Samarin on 2014-12-22 15:10:08 EST --- --- Additional comment from Oleg Samarin on 2014-12-22 15:11:37 EST --- I can'not attach anaconda.log because it has zero length
Starting with comment --- Additional comment from Oleg Samarin on 2014-12-19 13:29:28 EST --- this is a very different problem, so treat it that way.
The working hypothesis right now is the pvs is preferring a different name/path to the one that udev reports, so that lookup fails. This seems likely, since the udev info gets pulled just the once.
Which logs should I attach for more researching?
(In reply to Oleg Samarin from comment #3) > Which logs should I attach for more researching? Hi! I've placed an updates image at http://mulhern.fedorapeople.org/1178181.img. It's not a fix, it just adds some extra information to try to narrow down where the disagreement between the lvm and udev tools might be arising. The new information will be tagged with this bz and should pop up in storage.log. Could you try again, using image, and attach storage.log and program.log when completed. Thanks, - mulhern
How should I use this img-file?
(In reply to Oleg Samarin from comment #5) > How should I use this img-file? You can use it on the boot options command line as: inst.updates=<url to location of updates file>
I have the same issue when installing Fedora 22 on two machines. They both have imsm raid1 md126 of sda and sdb with lvm partition on md126p2. Before starting anaconda lvm sees md126p2 as a pv, but after starting anaconda lvm loses md126p2 and starts using sdb2 instead of md126p2. So python-blivet lookup fails
Created attachment 1031043 [details] pvdisplay out before starting anaconda
Created attachment 1031044 [details] journalctl output before starting anaconda
Created attachment 1031045 [details] pvdisplay output after starting anaconda
Created attachment 1031047 [details] journalctl output after starting anaconda
Created attachment 1031060 [details] program.log from anaconda
Created attachment 1031061 [details] storage.log from anaconda
The patch in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1226305 solves the problem in Fedora 22
Unfortunately, the log yielded no useful information. Reassigning...
I've already made the research and I have prepared a patch. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1226305 This ticket may be closed as duplicate of 1226305
But 1226305 is still unassigned.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1226305 ***