Bear in mind raid superblock v0.9 is deprecated as in "if it breaks it 
won't be fixed for you".

So I would skip this test, and if you're mentioning raid in the 
handbook, tell people they need to use one of the v1.x formats.

(NB - you can always point them at the linux raid wiki.)

Cheers,
Wol

On 05/01/2022 17:12, Randy Dunlap wrote:

Hi.
[adding linux-raid mailing list]


On 1/4/22 10:55, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

quoted

I am trying to document the mdadm-4.2 installation procedures for our book,
https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/postlfs/mdadm.html

For testing, I am doing a simple:

   make
   sudo ./test --keep-going --logdir=test-logs --save-logs

But I get failures for about half the tests.

Digging in a bit I just ran:

  sudo ./test --tests=00raid0 --logdir=test-logs

This is the first test that fails.  With some hacking, it appears that the first portion of this test that fails is:

   mdadm -CR $md0 -e0.90 -l0 -n4 $dev0 $dev1 $dev2 $dev3

This resolves to

   mdadm -CR /dev/md0 -e0.90 -l0 -n4 /dev/loop0 /dev/loop1 /dev/loop2 /dev/loop3

There is not a lot of error output in the test, so I manually ran:

   dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/mdtest0 count=20000 bs=1K
   losetup /dev/loop0 /tmp/mdtest0

For /dev/loop[0123]

Then I ran

   mdadm -CR /dev/md0 -e0.90 -l0 -n4 /dev/loop0 /dev/loop1 /dev/loop2 /dev/loop3
   mdadm: 0.90 metadata does not support layouts for RAID0

My question is whether the regression tests in the tarball are valid for mdadm-4.2?

   -- Bruce Dubbs
      linuxfromscratch.org

Note: The kernel is version 5.15.12.