From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marco Schindler Subject: Re: frequent disk activity with mdadm-3.3 Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 00:45:20 +0200 Message-ID: <164CD08B-99CA-4007-855A-7B0561B4EC76@gmail.com> References: <20140912082403.549fc298@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140912082403.549fc298@notabene.brown> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: NeilBrown Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 12.09.2014, at 00:24, NeilBrown wrote: > On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 00:05:08 +0200 Marco Schindler > wrote: >=20 > In that bug report you mention upgraded udev. Here you mention upgra= ding > mdadm.... a bit confusing. totally unsure if this is related, it may be coincidence.=20 just found it=92s odd to have a similar issue with two different proces= ses in such a short timeframe. I have blocked >sys-fs/udev-212 and >sys-fs/mdadm-3.2 for now to give d= rives some rest. > Can you use "blktrace" to gather details on exactly what is being rea= d and > when, and hopefully which process is doing it? >=20 > Is "mdadm --monitor" (or "-F") running? If you kill it does the disk > activity go away? >=20 > NeilBrown yes I have (and have been) running "mdadm --monitor --scan =97daemonise= " I have /proc/sys/vm/block_dump enabled and it shows process mdadm acess= ing drives every 15 minutes. I wouldn=92t be aware of mdadm being invoked elsewhere, so I presume it= won=92t happen when daemon is not running. Will see if I can get some more info with blktrace and report back.. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html