From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin Wilck Subject: Re: MDADM 3.3 broken? Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 22:39:27 +0100 Message-ID: <5293C38F.9000602@arcor.de> References: <528A7721.8080604@arcor.de> <20131119110110.396b2af3@notabene.brown> <528BBFEB.7050202@arcor.de> <20131120105115.27494ab6@notabene.brown> <20131120114833.695fc9d4@notabene.brown> <20131120133016.7de2d400@notabene.brown> <528E7202.902030 1@arcor.de> <528E7B92.1050703@arcor.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "David F." , linux-raid List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 11/21/2013 11:39 PM, David F. wrote: > Are you saying that the old obsolete DMRAID should still be used for > DDF RAID? What about the 2TiB limit? I'd rather see modern linux > RAID support work as good as it does for Windows. No, I haven't said that. On the contrary, I am actively working on getting mdadm support for DDF into the main distributions. I was just wondering about your setup because as far as I know, no distribution enables mdadm support for DDF. Doing that requires changes in the distribution's udev rules, intrd/initramfs generation code, and installer. See my DDF page in the Linux RAID wiki for details. Regards Martin > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Martin Wilck wrote: >> On 11/21/2013 10:10 PM, David F. wrote: >>> On that DMRAID - they are still yet to try it. But we do know the >>> RAID5 works via Int13h interface in real mode and via Windows. I >>> think they thought it was a 4 disk array? I'll ask if they know the >>> actually number of drives in the RAID configuration. >> >> What distribution are these people using? I am not aware of any distro >> that would activate mdadm for DDF RAID by default. >> >> Martin