From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Asdo Subject: Re: On mdadm 3.2 and bad-block-log Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:21:45 +0200 Message-ID: <50052099.4000401@shiftmail.org> References: <4FD7738D.3040403@shiftmail.org> <20120716134138.0f1c9cfc@notabene.brown> <5003C5BC.3070609@shiftmail.org> <5003D73B.3010609@shiftmail.org> <20120717114916.46263d92@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: <20120717114916.46263d92@notabene.brown> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: NeilBrown Cc: Alexander Lyakas , linux-raid List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 07/17/12 03:49, NeilBrown wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:56:27 +0200 Asdo wrote: > > Yes, there is a degree to which your data is at risk. This is always > the case with new code. If you upgrade to new -stable kernels as they > become available, that should minimise your risk as any fix that could > risk data or stability is backported to these -stable kernels. I am on kernel 3.4, that's "stable", right? > I don't know of any particularly serious bugs that have been found - they > mostly are triggered by unusual conditions. However unusual conditions do > happen. > > Thank you for using and testing the code. Has md found and recorded any bad > blocks for you, or are your bad-block logs still empty? Still empty for now They are filled only on read error + failed block rewrite, right? That will take a long time to happen... Thanks for your work