From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2zDoXVkaW8=?= Martins Subject: Re: Compatible Hardware Controllers (Smartctl, 8 port, SFF-8087) Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 23:23:12 +0100 Message-ID: <20100504232312.52ae8095.ctpm@ist.utl.pt> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Drew Cc: Andrew Dunn , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Tue, 4 May 2010 12:09:41 -0700 Drew wrote: > > The problem with this controller is that if you try to use smartctl= or > > smartd to monitor your drives, the controller will become unrespons= ive > > and offline an arbitrary amount of drives. This causes a huge probl= em > > in raid because then the drives get marked as failed and I have to > > force add them back into the array. >=20 > This is a known issue with the 1068 series which AFAIK there are some > patches floating around that resolve this issue. Refer to > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D14831 for particulars. >=20 Hi, Please take a look at https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D13594 As it seems to refer to the same issue. A patch is referred on the bottom of the bug page, but I haven't tried it yet. On Tue, 4 May 2010 14:45:29 -0400 Andrew Dunn wrote: > My solution is basically to move from raid5 to raid6 so that I can > afford a single drive failure, because I am not preempting a drive > malfunction. Do note that this probably won't do you any good on the long run. I have this issue and I've seen it kick out several drives in a row, so you can end up with a dead array even it it's raid6. Please let me know if you have any luck with any of the pacthes, and I'll do so also. Best regards. Cl=C3=A1udio -- 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