Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 02:00:08PM +0100, Charles Lyons - ConnetU wrote:
>
> This used to create a device:
>
> /dev/drbd0061
>
> However, the device now created is:
>
> /dev/drbd61
>
> without the leading 0s in the number, on the primary machine.
>
> This therefore breaks other associations which expect
> "/dev/drbd0061" in entirety to be present.
>
> I can't find any mention of this as a change in the release notes.
> It's almost as if it's not recognising my desired configured device
> name (and defaulting to another minor), or using a sprintf now
> formatting using a %d rather than %s for the device name.
>
>
> Is there a specific problem with my configuration, was there a
> planned change in the source, or is this a bug introduced?
>
>
> Thanks in advance for any input.
Hi Charles,
after a first look it seems like this happens in the end:
minor = strtol("/dev/drbd0061" + 9, NULL, 10); /* which is 61 */
The documentation states:
"This parameter is required and the standard device naming convention is
assumed.".
I have to further discuss this with my colleagues, regressions are
always nasty, but I would suggest that you change the naming. The device
parameter should be in the form of "/dev/drbd${minor}". "0061" is not a
valid Linux minor _number_ (while 0 and 61 are perfectly fine).
Regards, rck