Re: [patch v2 1/1] md: Software Raid autodetect dev list not array

2007-08-26 Thread Kyle Moffett
On Aug 26, 2007, at 08:20:45, Michael Evans wrote: Also, I forgot to mention, the reason I added the counters was mostly for debugging. However they're also as useful in the same way that listing the partitions when a new disk is added can be (in fact this augments that and the existing mes

raid10 or raid1+0 ?

2007-08-26 Thread T. Eichstädt
Hallo all, I have 4 HDDs and I want to use mirroring and striping. I am wondering what difference between the following two solutions is: - raid0 on top of 2 raid1 devices (raid1+0) - directly using the raid10 module Perhaps someone can give me a hint what the raid10 linux module does in diffe

Re: Patch for boot-time assembly of v1.x-metadata-based soft (MD) arrays: reasoning and future plans

2007-08-26 Thread Dan Williams
On 8/26/07, Abe Skolnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear Mr./Dr. Williams, > Just "Dan" is fine :-) > > Because you can rely on the configuration file to be certain about > > which disks to pull in and which to ignore. Without the config file > > the auto-detect routine may not always do the rig

Patch for boot-time assembly of v1.x-metadata-based soft (MD) arrays: reasoning and future plans

2007-08-26 Thread Abe Skolnik
Dear Mr./Dr. Williams, > Because you can rely on the configuration file to be certain about > which disks to pull in and which to ignore. Without the config file > the auto-detect routine may not always do the right thing because it > will need to make assumptions. But kernel parameters can prov

Re: [patch v2 1/1] md: Software Raid autodetect dev list not array

2007-08-26 Thread Michael Evans
On 8/26/07, Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 04:51:24 -0700 Michael J. Evans wrote: > > > From: Michael J. Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Is there any way to tell the user what device (or partition?) is > bein skipped? This printk should just print (confirm) that >

Re: Patch for boot-time assembly of v1.x-metadata-based soft (MD) arrays

2007-08-26 Thread Mr. James W. Laferriere
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007, Justin Piszcz wrote: On Sun, 26 Aug 2007, Abe Skolnik wrote: Dear Mr./Dr./Prof. Brown et al, I recently had the unpleasant experience of creating an MD array for the purpose of booting off it and then not being able to do so. Since I had already made changes to the array's

Re: [patch v2 1/1] md: Software Raid autodetect dev list not array

2007-08-26 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 04:51:24 -0700 Michael J. Evans wrote: > From: Michael J. Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > In current release kernels the md module (Software RAID) uses a static array > (dev_t[128]) to store partition/device info temporarily for autostart. > > This patch replaces that static a

Re: [patch v2 1/1] md: Software Raid autodetect dev list not array

2007-08-26 Thread Michael Evans
On 8/26/07, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Aug 26 2007 04:51, Michael J. Evans wrote: > > { > >- if (dev_cnt >= 0 && dev_cnt < 127) > >- detected_devices[dev_cnt++] = dev; > >+ struct detected_devices_node *node_detected_dev; > >+ node_detected_dev = kz

degenerated raid5 array doesn't rebuild

2007-08-26 Thread Marc Dietrich
Hi, I installed opensuse 10.3b2 on my server having 4 identical hard drives. on each drive is an 290 gb partition used for raid5. It seems, that the setup program created a degenerated array of sd[abc]2 and added the last as a spare drive. mdadm -D /dev/md1 reports: /dev/md1: Version : 01

Re: Patch for boot-time assembly of v1.x-metadata-based soft (MD) arrays

2007-08-26 Thread Dan Williams
On 8/26/07, Justin Piszcz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 26 Aug 2007, Abe Skolnik wrote: > > > Dear Mr./Dr./Prof. Brown et al, > > > > I recently had the unpleasant experience of creating an MD array for > > the purpose of booting off it and then not being able to do so. Since > > I had

Re: Patch for boot-time assembly of v1.x-metadata-based soft (MD) arrays

2007-08-26 Thread Justin Piszcz
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007, Abe Skolnik wrote: Dear Mr./Dr./Prof. Brown et al, I recently had the unpleasant experience of creating an MD array for the purpose of booting off it and then not being able to do so. Since I had already made changes to the array's contents relative to that which I clone

Patch for boot-time assembly of v1.x-metadata-based soft (MD) arrays

2007-08-26 Thread Abe Skolnik
Dear Mr./Dr./Prof. Brown et al, I recently had the unpleasant experience of creating an MD array for the purpose of booting off it and then not being able to do so. Since I had already made changes to the array's contents relative to that which I cloned it from, I did not want to reformat the arr

Re: [patch v2 1/1] md: Software Raid autodetect dev list not array

2007-08-26 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Aug 26 2007 04:51, Michael J. Evans wrote: > { >- if (dev_cnt >= 0 && dev_cnt < 127) >- detected_devices[dev_cnt++] = dev; >+ struct detected_devices_node *node_detected_dev; >+ node_detected_dev = kzalloc(sizeof(*node_detected_dev), GFP_KERNEL);\ What's the \ good

Re: [patch v2 1/1] md: Software Raid autodetect dev list not array

2007-08-26 Thread Michael Evans
Also, I forgot to mention, the reason I added the counters was mostly for debugging. However they're also as useful in the same way that listing the partitions when a new disk is added can be (in fact this augments that and the existing messages the autodetect routines provide). As for using auto

[patch v2 1/1] md: Software Raid autodetect dev list not array

2007-08-26 Thread Michael J. Evans
From: Michael J. Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In current release kernels the md module (Software RAID) uses a static array (dev_t[128]) to store partition/device info temporarily for autostart. This patch replaces that static array with a list. Signed-off-by: Michael J. Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -