From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Krekna Mektek Subject: Re: RAID 5 inaccessible - continued Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:35:14 +0100 Message-ID: <8b24c8b10602150135l15b3da13s@mail.gmail.com> References: <8b24c8b10602130708p3e2f9a1dh@mail.gmail.com> <8b24c8b10602140035t5ca2e41cv@mail.gmail.com> <17393.42370.394254.464935@cse.unsw.edu.au> <8b24c8b10602140235s7a4ef1fam@mail.gmail.com> <43F1FFE1.2010107@h3c.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: <43F1FFE1.2010107@h3c.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Hardy , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids I tried this one yesterday, with 2.6.15 that is. The same thing happened, at the bad block sectors it tried and skipped some but after a minute or two it stopped again. Hmmmz. Krekna 2006/2/14, Mike Hardy : > > > Krekna Mektek wrote: > > > The dd actually succeeded, and did finish the job in about one day. > > The badblocks were found after about the first 7 Gigs. > > Is this a 3-disk raid5 array? With two healthy disks and one bad disk? > > If so, then what you really want is a new kernel (2.6.15+? 2.6.14+?) > that has raid5 read-error-handling code in it. Neil just coded that up. > > If it's missing a disk and has a disk with bad sectors, then you've > already lost data, but you could use a combination of smart tests and dd > to zero out those specific sectors (and only those sectors...) then sync > a new disk up with the array... > > -Mike >