From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from nt.romanrm.net (nt.romanrm.net [185.213.174.59]) (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 8BFD820E314 for ; Thu, 8 May 2025 06:36:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.213.174.59 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746686202; cv=none; b=lqMdq7VHz32BNsxCyPZaFF2NPI+LCwY/iyV2NUWosSiDNR1THhXGlEUoFdlEVI48tl13kkeKwriOb5txNagfXFeebVk4Q3TxRA2XN0c1/YsPtUgwcOTCi/be1rIACRGGmw6h7tE9AvMddusBsJs5blvnJV54aFvmYxLTwvoNWGo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746686202; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Z46LjYv2mgZ/hncZvSUao2fZKGoSF/++l/rotGMWW6o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=pFKVemo38X+/DE0naVBu+DXyb2BP3/J3kROwjNmsVVa7itJ3OVfAbVKHDCCO+u0uWDnxU58vMnoSEy1HZaCWOf68VgOwt+5BnrIYzLcA+4vbZuix72J8TTEiSV1U5GBBpNArQ6iyKNKDd8HYkqtJGndWN9++aXQa4MZI9CEH01w= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=romanrm.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=romanrm.net; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.213.174.59 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=romanrm.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=romanrm.net Received: from nvm (umi.2.romanrm.net [IPv6:fd39:a37d:999f:7e35:7900:fcd:12a3:6181]) by nt.romanrm.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 4188B40EFC; Thu, 8 May 2025 06:27:02 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 11:27:01 +0500 From: Roman Mamedov To: Daniel Buschke Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: add fails: nvme1n1p2 does not have a valid v1.2 superblock, not importing Message-ID: <20250508112701.5a203e9a@nvm> In-Reply-To: <5e5df22d-ecd4-40fc-84dc-9508e28a6aae@devloop.de> References: <5e5df22d-ecd4-40fc-84dc-9508e28a6aae@devloop.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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 Tue, 6 May 2025 12:25:13 +0200 Daniel Buschke wrote: > 1. What exactly does this error message mean? I think replacing a failed > drive with a new one is what RAID is for? So this shouldn't be an issue > at all? > > 2. During my search I got the feeling that the problem is that the > failed drive is somehow still "present" in the raid. Thus the add is > handled as a "re add" which fails because there is no md superblock on > the new device. Is my conclusion correct? > > 3. If 2. is correct how do I remove the failed but not really present > device? Commands like "mdadm ... --remove failed" did not help. > > 4. I already replaced old devices in this RAID successfully before. What > may have changed that this issue happens? I agree that it is a weird error to get in this situation. "man mdadm" gives something to try: --add-spare Add a device as a spare. This is similar to --add except that it does not attempt --re-add first. The device will be added as a spare even if it looks like it could be an recent member of the array. Another idea (from the same man page) would be "mdadm ... --fail detached". -- With respect, Roman