From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luca Berra Subject: Re: RAID5 kicks non-fresh drives Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 20:38:26 +0200 Message-ID: <20060526183826.GE8203@percy.comedia.it> References: <1148663181.2836.11.camel@hendrix.hollabaugh.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1148663181.2836.11.camel@hendrix.hollabaugh.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 11:06:21AM -0600, Craig Hollabaugh wrote: >On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 12:45 -0400, Mark Hahn wrote: >> I think the current situation is good, since there is some danger of >> going too far. for instance, testing each partition to see whether >> it contains a valid superblock would be pretty crazy, right? requiring >> either the "auto-assemble-me" partition type, or explicit partitions >> given in a config file is a happy medium... >> > >I created my array in 1/2003, don't know versions of kernel or mdadm I >was using then. > >In my situation over the past few days. > kernel 2.4.30 kicked non-fresh > kernel 2.6.11.8 kicked non-fresh > kernel 2.6.18.8 didn't mention anything, just skipped my 'linux' >partitions > >These kernels auto-assemble prior to mounting /. So the kernel doesn't >consult my >/etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf file. Is this correct? i strongly believe it is not correct to let kernel auto-assemble devices kernel auto-assembly should be disable and activation should be handled by mdadm only! L. -- Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \