Hi Robert,
Robert Collins ha scritto:
So, I may have been writing an hpa interpreter.
Could you try with my patch, with and without 'libata.ignore_hpa=0' ?
For the HPA issue, Tejun Heo wrote[1] a patch but upstream never commented it.
He works on his NV raid, but I think make isw use the
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 07:59 +, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
Hi Robert,
Robert Collins ha scritto:
So, I may have been writing an hpa interpreter.
Could you try with my patch, with and without 'libata.ignore_hpa=0' ?
For the HPA issue, Tejun Heo wrote[1] a patch but upstream never
This tweak to the patch bounds-checks what we got, so we don't try to
read before the start of the disk.
** Attachment added: 20080512-bounds-checked
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26629442/17_fix_isw_raid_detection_1TB.patch
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
This updated patch is ready for testing; it uses the gafr string as a
signature, no build warnings added, finds my metadata using that on both
drives.
Of course, it could be coincidence, but then finding some users with the
same issue will be needed. I'm going to post to ubuntu-devel once I
build
Hmm, I still need to bounds-cap the read call. I'll do that tomorrow, I
think its unlikely to cause issues in practice but safe sorry.
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
I have the same setup on one of the drives in my ich10 raid. Looking
into it, it seems to be a bios recovery feature for gigabyte
motherboards, which apparently uses the ata HPA, which suggested
bug#219393, which says to add libata.ignore_hpa=0 to the kernel
command line, which fixes the problem
This isnt the HPA bug.
This is actually the metadata being moved to a different location so dmraid
cant find it.
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
This is actually the metadata being moved to a different location so
dmraid cant find it.
Right, the metadata is being moved by the HPA, so when the kernel
disables HPA, dmraid can't find the metadata any more.
With default settings (Ubuntu 9.04, 2.6.28-11-generic #42-Ubuntu SMP Fri Apr 17
with 2113 fewer total blocks on /dev/sda, and dmraid finds the
metadata on both disks.
sorry, 2113 fewer total sectors, not blocks
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 20:25 +, 3b wrote:
This is actually the metadata being moved to a different location so
dmraid cant find it.
with 2113 fewer total blocks on /dev/sda, and dmraid finds the metadata
on both disks.
So, I may have been writing an hpa interpreter.
Could you try with
Sure, if i can figure out how to build it :)
The version in
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dmraid/+bug/372170/comments/20
seems to be missing changes to isw.h though: ISW10_* and struct isw10
aren't defined that I could see.
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 23:10 +, 3b wrote:
Sure, if i can figure out how to build it :)
apt-get source dmraid
apt-get build-dep dmraid
wget
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26558415/17_fix_isw_raid_detection_1TB.patch
cd dmraid-1.0.0.rc15 (I think, you may have a slightly different name)
export
OK, looks like the patch is incomplete:
...
Applying patch 17_fix_isw_raid_detection_1TB.patch
patching file 1.0.0.rc15/lib/format/ataraid/isw.c
Hunk #1 succeeded at 300 (offset -7 lines).
Hunk #2 succeeded at 497 (offset -7 lines).
Hunk #3 succeeded at 516 (offset -7 lines).
Hunk #4 succeeded
quilt fail :(. This has the isw.h changes needed.
** Attachment removed: patch to detect on my hardware
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26492397/17_fix_isw_raid_detection_1TB.patch
** Attachment removed: Fully data driven patch, with fallback to hard code as
insurance.
** Attachment added: v3 dsc
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26610037/dmraid_1.0.0.rc15-6ubuntu3.dsc
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
** Attachment added: v3 diff.gz
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26610038/dmraid_1.0.0.rc15-6ubuntu3.diff.gz
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Tested dmraid from karmic with Robert's patch included on my ICH9
controller, and everything works fine.
My server has ICH10, since it was built last year, and likely has HPA
stuff I could enable, however I am not about to take it offline and plug
a pair of spare disks in to test unless there is
seems to work:
---
unpatched dmraid, without ignore_hpa=0:
$ sudo dmraid -r -d
/dev/sdb: isw, isw_ddiggddhgi, GROUP, ok, 490234750 sectors, data@ 0
---
unpatched, with ignore_hpa=0:
$ sudo dmraid -r -d
/dev/sdb: isw, isw_ddiggddhgi, GROUP, ok, 490234750 sectors, data@ 0
/dev/sda: isw,
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 00:41 +, Luke Yelavich wrote:
Tested dmraid from karmic with Robert's patch included on my ICH9
controller, and everything works fine.
My server has ICH10, since it was built last year, and likely has HPA
stuff I could enable, however I am not about to take it
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 00:58 +, 3b wrote:
seems to work:
...
Cool, thanks.
I think this validates the hpa theory, and we should rename the patch
accordingly. Better still would be to lookup the specs on hpa and
create||use a libhpa to adjust di-sectors. But that can wait.
-Rob
--
intel
Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 10:57 +, danwood76 wrote:
You could do a probe for the ICH10 tag for now.
That would probably be safer than guessing a dereference, then we need some
more ICH10R based people to test which will take time.
You could try building another
On Sun, 2009-05-10 at 13:13 +, danwood76 wrote:
Sounds good, if someone else with ICH10 can test it would be great.
Write a patch based on your idea and I will test it to verify it still
works with ICH8 also but I obviously cannot test the ICH10.
Thanks, shall do.
-Rob
--
intel isw
** Attachment added: debian diff for the 2nd version of patch
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26492490/dmraid_1.0.0.rc15-6ubuntu3.diff.gz
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
I've added some instrumentation and made my printf a log entry. dmraid
-rd now shows:
DEBUG: not isw at 1000204884992
DEBUG: isw metadata found at 1000203803136 from probe at 1000203803136
DEBUG: not isw at 1000204884992
DEBUG: isw metadata found at 1000203803136 from probe at 1000203803136
Is
This is the dd of the last 1K of disk (which is where the pre-existing
isw search code would look). As you can see its mainly NULL's but there
is a suspicious ICH10 late in the piece.
hexdump too:
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ||
*
0200 24 47 41
** Attachment added: dsc for second version (for dpkg-source -x laziness)
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26492494/dmraid_1.0.0.rc15-6ubuntu3.dsc
** Attachment removed: Updated debian package
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26351026/dmraid_1.0.0.rc15-6ubuntu3.diff.gz
--
intel isw raid
2113 in hex is 841, so the 0x4108 at bytes 0x206-0x207 (=518-519) could
be a dereference (-2113 sectors from here) except that it should be 842
as those bytes are in the -1 sector, not the -2.
If so, then this is definitely a new ISW metadata format; I'd have to
guess that the $GAFR is a new
You could do a probe for the ICH10 tag for now.
That would probably be safer than guessing a dereference, then we need some
more ICH10R based people to test which will take time.
You could try building another RAID set with a couple of other disks and
see if the meta is in the same place on
On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 10:57 +, danwood76 wrote:
You could do a probe for the ICH10 tag for now.
That would probably be safer than guessing a dereference, then we need some
more ICH10R based people to test which will take time.
You could try building another RAID set with a couple of
Yep looks that way.
I'm only on ICH8R, ICH10 is the latest Intel ICH controller from Q4 last year.
(according to their datasheets)
Its odd that they would have moved the metadata, I'm fairly sure the
RAID sets are compatible across versions of intel matrix raid. I can't
find any reference to the
My guess is they have added more data/larger journal space - something
like that, and that older formats will be read by the new controller but
not vice verca. I'll poke around there tomorrow.
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug
** Attachment added: Updated debian package
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26351026/dmraid_1.0.0.rc15-6ubuntu3.diff.gz
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
fdisk output:
$ sudo fdisk -u -l /dev/sda
Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x
(note that the signature is exactly 2115 sectors back from the end
** Attachment added: first version, just hard codes my sector in, but
demonstrates the shape of the patch.
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26351050/current.patch
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are
lspci details
** Attachment added: lspci.txt
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26351090/lspci.txt
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
It output
/dev/sdb: isw, isw_cahfcbgdcf, GROUP, ok, 1953523053 sectors, data@ 0
/dev/sda: isw, isw_cahfcbgdcf, GROUP, ok, 1953523053 sectors, data@ 0
to the console, and the attached subdirectory.
** Attachment added: dmraid -rD output directory.
Just for clarity - with my patch I've successfully installed Ubuntu,
though it wants me to manually dmraid -ay on boot; I'll track that down
later.
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
What ICH version are you using?
(couldnt read it from your lspci)
--
intel isw raid metadata at odd offset
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/372170
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corporation 82801JIR (ICH10R) LPC Interface
Controller
If I read that correctly its a ICH10R. If there is somewhere else I
should look, let me know and I'll go do so.
** Changed in: dmraid (Ubuntu)
Status: New = In Progress
** Description changed:
- Binary
39 matches
Mail list logo
