Re: Version 3.2.5 and ddf issues (bugreport)
flat view
From: NeilBrown <hidden>
Date: 2012-08-02 00:05:25
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:46:26 +0200 Albert Pauw [off-list ref] wrote:
On 07/31/2012 08:11 AM, NeilBrown wrote:quoted
On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 13:46:06 +0200 Albert Pauw [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Hi Neil, After a hiatus of 1.5 year (busy with all sorts) I am back and tried the ddf code to see how things improved.Thanks!quoted
I build a VM Centos 6.3 system with 6 extra 1GB disks for testing. I found several issues in the standard installed 3.2.3 version of mdadm relating to ddf, but installed the 3.2.5 version in order to work with recent code. However, while version 3.2.3 is able to create a ddf container with raidsets in it, I found a problem with the 3.2.5 version. After initially creating the container: mdadm -C /dev/md127 -e ddf -l container /dev/sd[b-g] which worked, I created a raid (1 or 5 it doesn't matter in this case) in it: mdadm -C /dev/md0 -l raid5 -n 3 /dev/md127 However, it stays on resync=PENDING and readonly, and doesn't get build. So I tried to set it to readwrite: mdadm --readwrite /dev/md0 Unfortunately, it stays on readonly and doesn't get build. As said before, this did work in 3.2.3. Are you already on this problem?It sounds like a problem with 'mdmon'. mdmon needs to be running before the array can become read-write. mdadm should start mdmon automatically but maybe it isn't. Maybe it cannot find mdmon? could you check if mdadm is running? If it isn't run mdmon /dev/md127 & and see if it starts working.Hi Neil, thanks for your reply. Yes, mdmon wasn't running. Couldn't get it running with a recompiled 3.2.5, the standard one which came with Centos (3.2.3) works fine, I assume the made some changes to the code? Anyway, I moved to my own laptop, running Fedora 16 and pulled mdadm frm git and recompiled. That works. I also used loop devices as disks. Here is the first of my findings: I created a container with six disks, disk 1-2 is a raid 1 device, disk 3-6 are a raid 6 device. Here is the table shown at the end of the mdadm -E command for the container: Physical Disks : 6 Number RefNo Size Device Type/State 0 06a5f547 479232K /dev/loop2 active/Online 1 47564acc 479232K /dev/loop3 active/Online 2 bf30692c 479232K /dev/loop5 active/Online 3 275d02f5 479232K /dev/loop4 active/Online 4 b0916b3f 479232K /dev/loop6 active/Online 5 65956a72 479232K /dev/loop1 active/Online I now fail a disk (disk 0) and I get: Physical Disks : 6 Number RefNo Size Device Type/State 0 06a5f547 479232K /dev/loop2 active/Online 1 47564acc 479232K /dev/loop3 active/Online 2 bf30692c 479232K /dev/loop5 active/Online 3 275d02f5 479232K /dev/loop4 active/Online 4 b0916b3f 479232K /dev/loop6 active/Online 5 65956a72 479232K /dev/loop1 active/Offline, Failed Then I removed the disk from the container: Physical Disks : 6 Number RefNo Size Device Type/State 0 06a5f547 479232K /dev/loop2 active/Online 1 47564acc 479232K /dev/loop3 active/Online 2 bf30692c 479232K /dev/loop5 active/Online 3 275d02f5 479232K /dev/loop4 active/Online 4 b0916b3f 479232K /dev/loop6 active/Online 5 65956a72 479232K active/Offline, Failed, Missing Notice the active/Offline status, is this correct? I added the disk back into the container, NO zero-superblock: Physical Disks : 6 Number RefNo Size Device Type/State 0 06a5f547 479232K /dev/loop2 active/Online 1 47564acc 479232K /dev/loop3 active/Online 2 bf30692c 479232K /dev/loop5 active/Online 3 275d02f5 479232K /dev/loop4 active/Online 4 b0916b3f 479232K /dev/loop6 active/Online 5 65956a72 479232K /dev/loop1 active/Offline, Failed, Missing It stays active/Offline (this is now correct I assume), Failed (again correct if had failed before), but also still missing. I remove the disk again, do a zero-superblock and add it again: Physical Disks : 6 Number RefNo Size Device Type/State 0 06a5f547 479232K /dev/loop2 active/Online 1 47564acc 479232K /dev/loop3 active/Online 2 bf30692c 479232K /dev/loop5 active/Online 3 275d02f5 479232K /dev/loop4 active/Online 4 b0916b3f 479232K /dev/loop6 active/Online 5 ede51ba3 479232K /dev/loop1 active/Online, Rebuilding This is correct, the disk is seen as a new disk and rebuilding starts. Regards, Albert
Hi Albert, thanks for this and your other reports. I won't be able to look at them for a while, but hopefully will get back to you some time next week. NeilBrown
Attachments
- signature.asc [application/pgp-signature] 828 bytes