From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: NeilBrown Subject: Re: RAID-6 disk superblock issue Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:07:51 +1100 Message-ID: <20111215090751.3801a75a@notabene.brown> References: <4EE8F26D.7010608@turmel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/qGPBvTYWt3ri1qvIDzydXTc"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Troy Telford Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids --Sig_/qGPBvTYWt3ri1qvIDzydXTc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 14:41:52 -0700 Troy Telford wrote: > On 2011-12-14 19:01:01 +0000, Phil Turmel said: >=20 > > Hi Troy, > >=20 > > On 12/13/2011 05:42 PM, Troy Telford wrote: > >=20 > > Let me guess: You have version 0.90 superblock, and sdl1 covers the=20 > > whole device? >=20 > sdl1 does cover the entire device, but I'm fairly certain I do not have=20 > a 0.90 superblock (Unless 0.90 was the standard version for Linux 2.6=20 > about two years ago.) It is mdadm that determines the superblock rather than the kernel, but you definitely have 0.90 superblocks - I can tell from the /proc/mdstat output (it doesn't list a version, so it must be 0.90). >=20 > Unfortunately, I'm not sure how to get my current superblock version: > $ sudo mdadm --examine /dev/md2 > mdadm: No md superblock detected on /dev/md2. >=20 > I find it curious that I can't detect the superblock for the MD device,=20 > even though the device is up, active, and working. The array doesn't have a superblock. Each member device does. mdadm --examine /dev/sdl1 >=20 > > Short term, change your mdadm.conf to only accept device names that end= =20 > > with a digit. Like so: > >=20 > > DEVICE /dev/sd[a-z][1-9] >=20 > OK, I'll give that a whirl. For the record, it was DEVICE partitions=20 > previously. >=20 > > Then rebuild your initramfs to include the new mdadm.conf. > >=20 > > Long term, rebuild your array with v1.x metadata. >=20 > You know, I was hoping to be able to wait until btrfs handles RAID-6=20 > (or "raid-z") arrays by the time I had to rebuild the array. I guess=20 > I'm not that lucky. You don't really need to rebuild the array. Just change the DEVICE line and all will be happy. (but I advise you never to plan on using software that hasn't be released y= et - that way lies madness). NeilBrown --Sig_/qGPBvTYWt3ri1qvIDzydXTc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUBTukeNznsnt1WYoG5AQKVLw/6A+ONDXLhA30LJFsj+og5vQe/UwMjPLgg HPKaMv418n2Mof5ePZh48/gJGqTU2q1zUrI5P3sKrjtqaD4QGPSnIZ7qc13CWyeN 4O78tp50W0wyapRvhw6tc/IFxL74xM/zJMHXgl85z7zUsH6zvzr+IkW58Z4rKjiD +zrQncH6WqvJVYaiDQkCvHsIWYtbAhMAPllq3EUJJHa5r05z/3LJXB9R8tyKh+gb iVfd01GLPYrUar9ij8QVkCkLDc2tjGMgTS+z7LerI1VOFW6ni1V5Yk8FZ//UtIWK 257AQ/p7ceXx1b7+jnCGaZFcCtEelMjCB+u44SKZzH2cTtABhcIq0XYp5tRrbNgO JpYTJrSha1ZdpMZGP6Lzk695Ov+l85fmfWxEjmU6bTG6uTVxhwEQLaPgjLAi1L6Z Kpi7FKpJXd8dPaZBSwaT1bKENp4fjSsYrgtvzj3rqlRuSEDBb2OzoeVzklsJaNsF Mse6jLQF/3E6nMlimcjLVMN4yWyEgQZrwOOa13VkaVZo18660clBbVuYlMjwsqUN ezYUIk4K/P/l/ML0rk9lGKTt8kP0tGbxQMe8kpCfwrsCrB1qK9Xdevbfdk2YwEe7 KphUW9MaubYPDCocbiZn6F1xESRTYySDMExKgvLqXIS0WHrmfx0SJTUybysFqY20 69WmaI59Rck= =k1os -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/qGPBvTYWt3ri1qvIDzydXTc--