From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro)" Subject: Re: raid1 faulty disk --> hot adding Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 09:21:09 +0300 Message-ID: <5d96567b05060923214dcefa75@mail.gmail.com> References: <5d96567b050609161261740204@mail.gmail.com> <17064.58907.391363.673963@cse.unsw.edu.au> Reply-To: "Raz Ben-Jehuda(caro)" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: <17064.58907.391363.673963@cse.unsw.edu.au> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Neil Brown Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Yes. my mistake. I tried it with two ramdisks and I made some stupid mistake. thanks Neil 6/10/05, Neil Brown wrote: > On Friday June 10, raziebe@gmail.com wrote: > > Hello guys. > > I tried to to raidhotadd a faulty disk to a mirror and it failed > > saying that "bd_claim failed on..." > > i took a dive into the code and it seems that when a disk in the raid > > fails the bd_holder fileld in > > the block_device struct remained with the old value although the disk > > was faulty. > > So the logical thing to do was to set rdev->bdev->bd_holder to 0x00 . > > I did it in the error() routine in raid1.c . > > This way I manage to hotadd a disk. > > Are there anyone here that can point his view regarding this matter ? > > If a drive fails, and you want to re-add it, what you should do is > first remove it, and then add it. > raidhotremove /dev/mdX /dev/sdY > raidhotadd /dev/mdX /dev/sdY > > (or equivalent mdadm commands). > > clearing bd_holder is certainly not the right thing to do. > > NeilBrown > > -- Raz Long Live the Penguin