From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guoqing Jiang Subject: Re: 95a05b3 broke mdadm --add on my superblock 1.0 array Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 02:40:21 -0400 Message-ID: <57E22B55.4010001@suse.com> References: <20160919163229.uccdr6bxiwetqvwo@derobert.net> <57E0CB6C.2040000@suse.com> <63417807-ae42-ed60-8c8b-3b699994c34c@derobert.net> <57E10311.7040601@suse.com> <20160920171223.n7t3wa673qopky4c@derobert.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160920171223.n7t3wa673qopky4c@derobert.net> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Anthony DeRobertis , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, 837964@bugs.debian.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 09/20/2016 01:12 PM, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > >> Which kernel version are you used to created the array in case the kernel >> was updated? > I've had the array for a while (the superblocks with -E show a creation > time of Wed Jun 16 14:25:08 2010). If I had to take a guess, I'd guess > it was created with the Debian squeeze alpha1 installer... So probably > 2.6.30 or 2.6.32. > Hmm, lots of things are changed from 2.6.30, so it is possible that latest mdadm can't work well with array which was created with the old kernel. Thanks, Guoqing