Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
DescriptionCorey Marthaler
2017-04-06 22:27:34 UTC
Description of problem:
[root@host-073 ~]# lvcreate -i 2 --type raid4 -L 100M -n LV1 VG
Using default stripesize 64.00 KiB.
Rounding size 100.00 MiB (25 extents) up to stripe boundary size 104.00 MiB(26 extents).
Logical volume "LV1" created.
# Replaced LV type raid5_n? but that's exactly the type i specified.
[root@host-073 ~]# lvconvert --type raid5_n VG/LV1
Using default stripesize 64.00 KiB.
Replaced LV type raid5_n with possible type raid5_n.
Do you want to convert raid5_n LV VG/LV1 to raid5_n? [y/n]: y
Logical volume VG/LV1 successfully converted.
[root@host-073 ~]# lvs -a -o +devices,segtype
LV VG Attr LSize Cpy%Sync Devices Type
LV1 VG rwi-a-r--- 104.00m 100.00 LV1_rimage_0(0),LV1_rimage_1(0),LV1_rimage_2(0) raid5_n
[LV1_rimage_0] VG iwi-aor--- 52.00m /dev/sdb1(1) linear
[LV1_rimage_1] VG iwi-aor--- 52.00m /dev/sdc1(1) linear
[LV1_rimage_2] VG iwi-aor--- 52.00m /dev/sda1(1) linear
[LV1_rmeta_0] VG ewi-aor--- 4.00m /dev/sdb1(0) linear
[LV1_rmeta_1] VG ewi-aor--- 4.00m /dev/sdc1(0) linear
[LV1_rmeta_2] VG ewi-aor--- 4.00m /dev/sda1(0) linear
# Here it makes sense as raid6 is not possible, however raid6_n_6 is.
[root@host-073 ~]# lvconvert --type raid6 VG/LV1
Using default stripesize 64.00 KiB.
Replaced LV type raid6 with possible type raid6_n_6.
Do you want to convert raid6 LV VG/LV1 to raid6_n_6? [y/n]: y
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
lvm2-2.02.169-3.el7 BUILT: Wed Mar 29 09:17:46 CDT 2017
lvm2-libs-2.02.169-3.el7 BUILT: Wed Mar 29 09:17:46 CDT 2017
lvm2-cluster-2.02.169-3.el7 BUILT: Wed Mar 29 09:17:46 CDT 2017
device-mapper-1.02.138-3.el7 BUILT: Wed Mar 29 09:17:46 CDT 2017
device-mapper-libs-1.02.138-3.el7 BUILT: Wed Mar 29 09:17:46 CDT 2017
device-mapper-event-1.02.138-3.el7 BUILT: Wed Mar 29 09:17:46 CDT 2017
device-mapper-event-libs-1.02.138-3.el7 BUILT: Wed Mar 29 09:17:46 CDT 2017
device-mapper-persistent-data-0.7.0-0.1.rc6.el7 BUILT: Mon Mar 27 10:15:46 CDT 2017
Comment 2Heinz Mauelshagen
2017-04-12 12:43:06 UTC
Fixed in upstream commit eb6302c8cb6bfd1d9831e5ff3d76ecbb49613178 which'll be contained in lvm2 version 170.
Comment 3Heinz Mauelshagen
2017-04-12 14:13:16 UTC
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://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2017:2222