From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ethan Wilson Subject: Are we forced to use bad blocks list? Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 16:31:28 +0200 Message-ID: <53DA5340.7080507@shiftmail.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-raid List-Id: linux-raid.ids Dear MD developers, it seems that with mdadm 3.3.1 , if an array has bad blocks disabled (e.g. "--update=no-bbl" was invoked) and we want to add a disk to that array, e.g. a spare, that one will be created by mdadm with BBL enabled during the --add operation. There is apparently no "--add --no-bbl" option in mdadm, so the BBL will result in being forcibly active for that disk, it seems to me. It is indeed possible to "--stop" the array and then "--assemble --update=no-bbl" so to clear the BBL flag in all disks, but this requires stopping the array, which for a production system often is not possible, and not justified for just adding a spare. Can I add a "feature request" to have BBL optional, and/or to default BBL presence/absence so that it conforms to the presence/absence of BBLs in the other disks of the array which is already running? The same problem probably happens when mdadm monitor daemon moves spares among the spare-group: it should probably understand if the receiving array is configured for BBL or not, and add a spare of the same type. Thank you EW