Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 510634
update support for ext4 in anaconda
Last modified: 2011-01-24 19:04:03 EST
Description of problem:
RHEL 5.4 is updating ext4 support to the stable release; see bug 485315. As a result, the kernel module is no longer named ext4dev.ko, it's just ext4.ko. However, anaconda is still looking for ext4dev.ko.
If you boot with the 'ext4' command line option, when you get to the partitioning screen, the list of filesystems does not include ext4.
The /tmp/anaconda.log also indicates this with:
22:37:33 DEBUG : module(s) md raid5 raid6 jbd2 crc16 ext4dev reiserfs jfs not found
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. start install with ext4 command line option
2. look for ext4 in partitioning screens
ext4 is available as a filesystem
I believe the fix is as simple as:
diff --git a/scripts/mk-images b/scripts/mk-images
index 48ba567..e6f1c05 100755
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ USBMODS="ohci-hcd uhci-hcd ehci-hcd hid mousedev usb-storage sd_mod sr_mod ub"
FIREWIREMODS="ieee1394 ohci1394 sbp2"
SCSIMODS="sr_mod sg st sd_mod scsi_mod iscsi_tcp iscsi_ibft"
-FSMODS="fat msdos vfat ext3 ext4dev reiserfs jfs xfs gfs2 lock_nolock"
+FSMODS="fat msdos vfat ext3 ext4 reiserfs jfs xfs gfs2 lock_nolock"
LVMMODS="dm-mod dm-zero dm-snapshot dm-mirror dm-multipath dm-round-robin dm-emc dm-crypt"
RAIDMODS="md raid0 raid1 raid10 raid5 raid6 raid456 dm-raid45 dm-mem-cache dm-region_hash dm-message"
SECSTAGE="$RAIDMODS $LVMMODS $FSMODS $IDEMODS $SCSIMODS"
Created attachment 351196 [details]
patch to fix support for ext4
The fix was slightly more complex than my original thought in comment 1. Attached is a patch that also modifies loader2/loader.c
I tested it by building a custom initrd.img for RHEL 5.4 20090708.0 Xen x86_64 with:
1. the sbin/loader and sbin/init from the patched anaconda
2. the kernel modules ext4.ko, jbd2.ko, and crc16.ko from 2.6.18-157.el5xen x86_64
3. adding the following line to modules/modules.dep
ext4: jbd2 crc16
With the above changes, Anaconda actually listed both ext4 and ext4dev. I chose ext4 for the / partition and the installation succeeded.
ext4dev can probably be removed now.
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has requested
further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed
products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update
This will be available in anaconda-188.8.131.52-1.
With snap #3 and ext4 parameter I'm able to complete the install. However anaconda UI shows ext4 and ext4dev as available file systems. Shouldn't ext4dev be removed? What's the difference between both?
Good point, Alexander, I'm seeing the same thing (both ext4 and ext4dev options) in the filesystem choice drop down interface ... (using s390x with snap #3) ...
Joel has a patch in review to get rid of the rest of ext4dev - next snap
Verified on build RHEL5.4-Server-20090722.0, snapshot 4.
anaconda version: anaconda-184.108.40.206-1
Changing Bug to VERIFIED.
Event posted on 07-31-2009 02:35pm EDT by Glen Johnson
------- Comment From email@example.com 2009-07-31 14:11 EDT-------
I am trying an install with snap4 using ext4 as the /boot fs. I'm
getting a pop-up
The following errors exist with your requested partitioning scheme.
Bootable partitions cannot be on an ext4 filesystem.
These errors must be corrected prior to continuing with your install of
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server.
Is it true that ext4 is not supported for the /boot fs? If so, where can
I find the
documentation to state exactly what is supported and what changes to
the ext4 filesystem?
Using ext4 as / and other filesystems seem to work fine.
Ticket type changed from 'Problem' to ''
This event sent from IssueTracker by jkachuck
(In reply to comment #15)
> Is it true that ext4 is not supported for the /boot fs?
Yes, grub can't read ext4 at present.
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.