From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Friedrich Lobenstock Subject: Re: [BUG?] count of "Spare Devices" wrong after fail/remove/add Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:46:24 +0100 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <3E2E5A60.5070309@fl.priv.at> References: <3E2CA044.5030202@fl.priv.at> <15918.7346.888218.690481@notabene.cse.unsw.edu.au> Reply-To: Linux RAID Mailing Liste Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <15918.7346.888218.690481@notabene.cse.unsw.edu.au> To: Linux RAID Mailing Liste List-Id: linux-raid.ids Neil Brown wrote: > On Tuesday January 21, fl@fl.priv.at wrote: >> Active Devices : 2 >>Working Devices : 2 >> Failed Devices : 0 >> Spare Devices : 2 >> >> >> Number Major Minor RaidDevice State >> 0 3 1 0 active sync /dev/hda1 >> 1 22 1 1 active sync /dev/hdc1 >> UUID : d876333b:694e852b:e9a6f40f:0beb90f9 >> >>I do wounder why I've got 2 spare drives despite the fact that I >>did not add any. I've just got two drives in this raid1 that's it. > > Yes, it's probably a bug in the kernel code. The counting in the 2.4 code is very > clumsy. I think it is benign so it wont be fixed. The code in 2.5 is > very different and shouldn't have this problem. Ok. Just wanted to let you know. >>PS: Array Size : 40209024 (38.35 GiB 41.22 GB) >>should IMHO be >> Array Size : 40209024 (38.35 GiB 40.21 GB) > > I disgree. An array side of 40209024 means that many kibibytes. > i.e. 40209024 * 1024 which is > 41174040576 bytes. > Hmmm...why don't we forget about this kibibytes sh.. anyways, it's not worth the troubles IMHO. -- MfG / Regards Friedrich Lobenstock