From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phil Turmel Subject: Re: What is the solution for USB HDs Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 22:17:19 -0500 Message-ID: <9481982b-bfda-644e-e160-74b94bbbec0c@turmel.org> References: <13e51316a11df7b0c9f5ab89392361de@juan-carlos.info> <171542c9-1ab8-0993-733d-fbb95467f512@websitemanagers.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <171542c9-1ab8-0993-733d-fbb95467f512@websitemanagers.com.au> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Adam Goryachev , juca@juan-carlos.info, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 12/11/2016 05:14 PM, Adam Goryachev wrote: > On 12/12/16 04:14, juca@juan-carlos.info wrote: > If you are still having problems after that, then please try to post > more details on what happens when the drives vanish (eg, kernel logs, > system logs, etc). > > Also, you might consider an alternative SBC, some have SATA ports > already available (RPi are the only SBC's I've used, but there are many > other options/variations). There's also a kernel boot parameter that can cut off all USB auto-suspend, which I suspect is part of the problem. It has been known for a long time that USB is not robust enough to be trusted in MD arrays. { looking around..... } usbcore.autosuspend=-1 is what you need in your bootloader or builtin to the kernel. Phil