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.
Bug 602680 - parted confusing warning creating ext4
Summary: parted confusing warning creating ext4
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: parted
Version: 6.0
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Hans de Goede
QA Contact: Release Test Team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-06-10 13:14 UTC by Issue Tracker
Modified: 2018-10-27 12:00 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-06-30 15:09:24 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Issue Tracker 2010-06-10 13:14:30 UTC
Escalated to Bugzilla from IssueTracker

Comment 1 Issue Tracker 2010-06-10 13:14:31 UTC
Event posted on 06-09-2010 05:04pm EDT by woodard

Description of problem:
I can't tell if this is a logic error or if it is a bogus warning but it certainly is confusing.

(parted) mkpart primary ext4 0 -1s                                        
Warning: You requested a partition from 0.00B to 1000GB.                  
The closest location we can manage is 17.4kB to 1000GB.
Is this still acceptable to you?
Yes/No? yes     

That makes sense.

(parted) mkpart primary ext4 37s -1s                                       
Warning: You requested a partition from 18.9kB to 1000GB.                 
The closest location we can manage is 18.9kB to 1000GB.
Is this still acceptable to you?
Yes/No? n                                                                 

Notice that these numbers match? That doesn't make sense.

(parted) mkpart primary ext4 36s -1s                                      
Warning: You requested a partition from 18.4kB to 1000GB.                 
The closest location we can manage is 18.4kB to 1000GB.
Is this still acceptable to you?
Yes/No? n                                                                 
(parted) mkpart primary ext4 35s -1s                                      
Warning: You requested a partition from 17.9kB to 1000GB.                 
The closest location we can manage is 17.9kB to 1000GB.
Is this still acceptable to you?
Yes/No? n                                                                 
(parted) mkpart primary ext4 34s -1s                                      
Warning: You requested a partition from 17.4kB to 1000GB.                 
The closest location we can manage is 17.4kB to 1000GB.
Is this still acceptable to you?
Yes/No? y                                                                 
Warning: The resulting partition is not properly aligned for best performance.
Ignore/Cancel? c                                                          


How reproducible:
always

Additional info:
parted-2.1-8.el6.x86_64
This event sent from IssueTracker by tgummels  [LLNL (HPC)]
 issue 999883

Comment 2 RHEL Program Management 2010-06-10 13:23:36 UTC
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux major release.  Product Management has requested further
review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux Major release.  This request is not yet committed for
inclusion.

Comment 3 Hans de Goede 2010-06-30 15:09:24 UTC
Hi,

If you were to do a "unit s" command before the mkpart commands so that the
Warning messages printed will be in sectors the results will make a lot more sense.

-1 / -1s translates to the last sector of the disk. But when using a gpt label the last part of the disk is used for the backup gpt, so it cannot be used. The message does not seem logical because the end of the disk and the end of the disk minus the size of the backup gpt both get printed as 1000GB. If you change the printing unit to sectors using: "unit s" you will see that the last sector is the one which is not what you are requesting.

To not get this kind of messages and let parted do its thing wrt aligning partitions for optimal alignment, you could for example use:
mkpart primary ext4 0G 1000G
or more generic:
mkpart primary ext4 0G -1G

Parted will not give the warning if the error is less then 1 "unit" so by using
-1G you are saying put the partition end within 1G of the disk.

Regards,

Hans


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.