From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B23555A4D4 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 12:08:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711022883; cv=none; b=PFs6aW8A+BBh8I4YQjZ5RgDE/sJzsOhdcM6yiUWNE9HUXF/scURGamG6EGqLFfG/tdCIDxLU2fVZdwr4Z2O+rguqcF26gm+AdBPY16KHdSKJfYVdiXG2ICKW5Ja31krCQoCrBF3yXXidYtlhEvVQZ9OTMcQDDFDTSslHFaE4tMY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711022883; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qAi7Aj56RyYfGXKkA6g5uewwBFCpPyXIiX96fyMyzDc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=GnlJdKSRzqLDQUJ8Y5norCxhVyhdhp1XLw852qO+yPJ/80DBGFjYHJDxXjv9XJAlK/VGRF5vjqq90poSBUuHRaHfLXskSXJwKi7NWwCU7KAL7RAJST0CCc1ucJrXWjFp8cffgEVpAtXsdK1UhajtH+pUuRmyw8EXIUPMpI+FvE0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=VY4d7uuT; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="VY4d7uuT" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1711022882; x=1742558882; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qAi7Aj56RyYfGXKkA6g5uewwBFCpPyXIiX96fyMyzDc=; b=VY4d7uuTt3glfDTuqVdDq3PXqFO1bIQwZiQ83fGUiTxhV39eoDNwFlo1 3+8ESOD5h3MaoiBpINWpQiOTbn6mHmjUwDJreXP8UFFBwkPdh8mkix21N GH6mi0UlzW5PXS9nRiEEghXHRVckZGwsO/nqYd9iBRtoIeRXDbXCuqG4C EMzefDZPUD9OPwKSFxrzy0RQ3t+ze9ajszCkv9EfHAkZGAOLb697bvkQM 8qu1/pzQY194aIFqTjaF0OIkAMd/9+Zw9qljJGaHYHhMM1N++1pefkLCy 3FmQ4q3bkW4HGaxqxvlJQ6LH75Sq1B2NHjSdE5r9oN2v8GT3ini0czVjk A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11019"; a="5854625" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,142,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="5854625" Received: from orviesa008.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.148]) by fmvoesa113.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Mar 2024 05:07:56 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,142,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="15127717" Received: from mtkaczyk-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.246.17.194]) by orviesa008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Mar 2024 05:07:53 -0700 Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 13:07:48 +0100 From: Mariusz Tkaczyk To: d tbsky , Xiao Ni Cc: list Linux RAID Subject: Re: md-uuid inconsistent in the future Message-ID: <20240321130748.0000091d@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.0 (GTK 3.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 23:15:34 +0800 d tbsky wrote: > Hi: > today I want to install RHEL 9.3 with mdadm software raid1 "/boot" > partition to a server. installation failed with message "failed to > write boot loader configuration". > > I switched to console and "dmesg" showed a lot of errors about "rtc > write failed with error -22". I checked the system time and found > someone set the server to year "2223". I correct the time to year > "2024" and reinstall RHEL 9.3 with the same disk layout (eg: I didn't > recreate mdadm raid since it will need extra steps). and again > installation failed with the same error message. > > I was curious so I checked what happened. I found md-uuid string is > reversed from "/dev/disk/by-id" and mdadm itself. Below are some > strange results. Maybe the issue is not important and people in the > far future will fix it someday if we don't kill the bug. Just share > the experience. > > >ls -la /dev/disk/by-id | grep md-uuid > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 11 Mar 20 03:10 > md-uuid-a4e266d2:68ae1848:1a6d6a71:a419ebdb -> ../../md127 > > >mdadm --examine --scan > ARRAY /dev/md/boot metadata=1.2 > UUID=d266e2a4:4818ae68:716a6d1a:dbeb19a4 > name=localhost.localdomain:boot > > >mdadm -E /dev/sda2 (result show created at year 2223) > /dev/sda2: > Magic : a92b4efc > Version : 1.2 > Feature Map : 0x1 > Array UUID : d266e2a4:4818ae68:716a6d1a:dbeb19a4 > Name : localhost.localdomain:boot (local to host > localhost.localdomain) > Creation Time : Fri Nov 14 07:32:22 2223 > Raid Level : raid1 > Raid Devices : 5 > > Avail Dev Size : 1048576 sectors (512.00 MiB 536.87 MB) > Array Size : 524288 KiB (512.00 MiB 536.87 MB) > Data Offset : 2048 sectors > Super Offset : 8 sectors > Unused Space : before=1968 sectors, after=0 sectors > State : clean > Device UUID : 4007990e:44762c79:efab3543:04a55382 > > Internal Bitmap : 8 sectors from superblock > Update Time : Wed Mar 20 03:07:49 2024 > Bad Block Log : 512 entries available at offset 16 sectors > Checksum : 87a9793f - correct > Events : 38 > > > Device Role : Active device 3 > Array State : AAAAA ('A' == active, '.' == missing, 'R' == replacing) > > > >mdadm --details /dev/md127 (result show created at year 2106 which is not > >correct) > /dev/md127: > Version : 1.2 > Creation Time : Sun Feb 7 06:28:15 2106 > Raid Level : raid1 > Array Size : 524288 (512.00 MiB 536.87 MB) > Used Dev Size : 524288 (512.00 MiB 536.87 MB) > Raid Devices : 5 > Total Devices : 5 > Persistence : Superblock is persistent > > Intent Bitmap : Internal > > Update Time : Wed Mar 20 03:07:49 2024 > State : clean > Active Devices : 5 > Working Devices : 5 > Failed Devices : 0 > Spare Devices : 0 > > Consistency Policy : bitmap > > Number Major Minor RaidDevice State > 0 8 50 0 active sync /dev/sdd2 > 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2 > 2 8 34 2 active sync /dev/sdc2 > 3 8 2 3 active sync /dev/sda2 > 4 8 66 4 active sync /dev/sde2 > Hi, There could be a regression in upstream for mdadm --detail --export. See proposed fix: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-raid/patch/20240318151930.8218-3-mariusz.tkaczyk@linux.intel.com/ There are no comments so I will merge fix soon. Xiao, Could you please check RHEL 9.3 and eventually revert the patch in z-stream? Thanks, Mariusz