From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Albert Pauw Subject: More ddf container woes Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:34:53 +0100 Message-ID: <4D788D2D.80706@gmail.com> References: <4D5FA5C4.8030803@gmail.com> <4D63688E.5030501@gmail.com> <20110223171712.09509f9e@notabene.brown> <4D67ECA2.2020201@gmail.com> <20110303093136.586df7e7@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110303093136.586df7e7@notabene.brown> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: NeilBrown Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Hi Neil, I found some more trouble with the ddf code, separate from the stuff I mentioned before (which is still present in the version I used below). Here's what I did and found: Note: Updated mdadm from the git repository up to and including the commit "Manage: be more careful about --add attempts." Used six disks, sdb - sdg out of which I created a 5-disk container, leaving one disk unused for the moment: mdadm -C /dev/md127 -l container -e ddf -n 5 /dev/sd[b-f] Created two RAID sets in this container: mdadm -C /dev/md0 -l 1 -n 2 /dev/md127 mdadm -C /dev/md1 -l 5 -n 3 /dev/md127 Note: At this moment, only one mdmon is running (mdmon md127) After finishing creating both RAID sets, I fail two disks, one in each RAID set: mdadm -f /dev/md0 /dev/sdb mdadm -f /dev/md1 /dev/sdd The first failed disk (sdb) is automatically removed from /dev/md0, but oddly enough the disk stays marked as "active/Online" in the "mdadm -E /dev/md127" output, the second failed disk (sdd) gets marked [F] in the RAID 5 array, but NOT removed, only when I do a mdmon --all the failed disk in /dev/md1 is removed, this second failed disk IS marked "Failed" in the "mdadm -E output". Note: Checking on the RAID arrays using "mdadm -D" they are both marked as "clean, degraded". I now add a new empty clean disk (/dev/sdg) to the container, after which md1 (the RAID 5 set) is immediately starting to rebuild. The RAID 1 set (md0), however, is set to "resync=DELAYED", very odd, because I only added one disk. Looking at the output of /proc/mdstat i see that disk sdg (the new spare) is actually added to both RAID arrays, and after finishing the rebuild of md1 the other RAID set (md0) is also rebuild, using the SAME spare disk (sdg). Albert