From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francois Barre Subject: Raid5 over sbp2 : sbp2 command abort Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 14:50:03 +0100 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-raid List-Id: linux-raid.ids Hello all, This is a cross-post (sorry for that), but I don't know where it comes = from yet. A. The setup VIA EPIA 10k Nehemiah, OHCI with VIA 4 sbp2 250Go IDE drives Vanilla 2.6.15.1 kernel, mdadm 2.2, superblock 0.90 ohci1394+sbp2 in kernel (default params : serialize_io=3D1, ...), raid5 as a module. B. The tests Test0 : Creating a 4-drive raid5 with 1 drive missing, copying the 4th drive content to the raid5, works great. Stress-testing multiple drive copy seems to be ok (Test0 + various tests), very responsive, absolutely no error, but Test1 has a lot of 'command abort' errors, which blocks io for seconds, then starts again. Test1 : Building from scratch the raid5 with 4 drives (i.e. none missing), causes 'sbp2 : command abort' messages. At the end of Test1, raid5 is not created : one drive is set faulty. C. The questions : How could I run a parano=EFd/degraded bandwidth mode ? I tried playing with /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max, reducing to far away from highest bandwidth, but it did not have the expected behaviour : io runs to highest bw for seconds, then stops, then runs again at highest rate, ... Is there a way to avoid write back at sbp2 level ? I could not find any way to do so... What kernel version should I rather use ? Seems like scsi on 2.6.15.x is not really trustworthy, should I run 2.6.14.x ? Best regards, =46.-E.B. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html