linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Patrick Smears <patrick@smears.org>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mdadm fails to recognise DDF partitions from Marvell MV64460 controller
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 09:28:20 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131207092820.66c7be92@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52A20CFC.7050802@smears.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1916 bytes --]

On Fri, 06 Dec 2013 17:44:28 +0000 Patrick Smears <patrick@smears.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I have a Lenovo D20 server, which has a Marvel MV64460 (fake)RAID 
> controller.
> 
> For various reasons I need to be able to dual-boot the machine with 
> Windows, so I need to use the native RAID format (which the Windows 
> drivers understand).
> 
> It uses DDF metadata on its partitions, which I've been using 
> successfully with "dmraid" for some time, but I'd like to move to mdadm 
> since the dmraid support is lacking in a number of respects (e.g. cannot 
> create metadata; cannot rebuild arrays, etc...).
> 
> Unfortunately, though dmraid recognises the partition as DDF, mdadm does 
> not - it always reports the disk as having no superblock.
> 
> I've done some debugging on this, and it appears that the RAID 
> controller's BIOS departs from the DDF spec in a couple of (minor) ways 
> - and so because mdadm is stricter in its checks than dmraid, it refuses 
> to recognise the disk.
> 
> I think I can come up with a patch to work around this - should I do 
> that and submit it (and if so, where should I send it)? Or would it be 
> better to describe the issues I've found in more detail first?
> 

A patch is often a good way to describe an issue in detail - though you
should include plain-language text as well of course.
Patches can be posted to this list.

The only "DDF" I've come across which mdadm doesn't like is DDFv1.0 which has
all multi-byte values in the "other" order, and uses a different checksum
algorithm.  As I cannot find  a document describing DDFv1.0 I cannot
calculate the checksum so I cannot update the metadata, so I cannot use
DDFv1.0.

If the "minor" variances you found don't prevent us from being able to update
the metadata and still have it recognised by the card, then I'm certainly
interested in a patch.

Thanks,
NeilBrown

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2013-12-06 22:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-12-06 17:44 mdadm fails to recognise DDF partitions from Marvell MV64460 controller Patrick Smears
2013-12-06 22:28 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2013-12-07 16:29   ` Patrick Smears

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20131207092820.66c7be92@notabene.brown \
    --to=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=patrick@smears.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).