On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 02:13:38PM -0600, Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
> Ricardo Correia wrote:
> >If I'm not mistaken, there are some new reserved pool names (raidz1,
> >raidz2 and spare) that weren't being properly checked for (in
> >zfs_namecheck.c).
> >
> >There were also some errors that weren't being handled in libzfs_dataset.c
> >(they were detected by gcc's warnings).
> >
>
>
> I just opened the following bug:
>
> 6441206 missing checks in zfs_namecheck()
Actually, this was intentionally not put in zfs_namecheck() due to
backwards compatibility issues. If you already had a pool named
'raidz_something', then if we put the check in zfs_namecheck(), you
wouldn't be able to do _anything_ to the pool. See the comment in
zpool_name_valid():
/*
* The rules for reserved pool names were extended at a later point.
* But we need to support users with existing pools that may now be
* invalid. So we only check for this expanded set of names during a
* create (or import), and only in userland.
*/
- Eric
--
Eric Schrock, Solaris Kernel Development http://blogs.sun.com/eschrock
