Your message dated Mon, 4 Sep 2006 10:41:16 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> has caused the Debian Bug report #385951, regarding Fail to scan array in some case when partition is at the end of the disk to be marked as having been forwarded to the upstream software author(s) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---tags 385951 upstream thanks Neil, this one looks like a bug, not sure how to fix it though. Maybe prevent scanning /dev/hdX if you are also scanning /dev/hdXY ? One comment inline: also sprach Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.09.04.1005 +0200]: > Package: mdadm > Version: 2.5.2-7 > Severity: critical > > Tha actual mdadm in testing makes the whole system to unbootable if on > raid slice is on the end of a disk. (In some cases) > > My config: > ---mdadm.conf--- > DEVICE partitions > ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid1 num-devices=2 > UUID=88cf7fb7:6fab12d7:b713c983:af6eaca5 > MAILADDR root > ---------------- > > ---hdc--- > Disk /dev/hdc: 60.0 GB, 60060155904 bytes > 16 heads, 63 sectors/track, 116374 cylinders > Units = cylinders of 1008 * 512 = 516096 bytes > > Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System > /dev/hdc1 * 1 496 249983+ 83 Linux > /dev/hdc2 497 1488 499968 82 Linux swap / Solaris > /dev/hdc3 1489 116374 57902544 fd Linux raid autodetect > --------- > ---hdd--- > Disk /dev/hdd: 320.0 GB, 320072933376 bytes > 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 38913 cylinders > Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes > > Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System > /dev/hdd1 1 9728 78140159+ 8e Linux LVM > /dev/hdd2 9729 19456 78140160 8e Linux LVM > /dev/hdd3 31705 38913 57906292+ fd Linux raid autodetect > --------- See the + at the end of the number of blocks of /dev/hdd3? This means there's a little space left at the end of the disk, I think. See sfdisk(8): The trailing - and + signs indicate that rounding has taken place, and that the actual value is slightly less (more). To see the exact val‐ ues, ask for a listing with sectors as unit. This is not the case for /dev/hdc (and on my own systems). > ---/proc/mdstat--- > Personalities : [raid1] > read_ahead 1024 sectors > md0 : active raid1 hdd3[0] > 57902464 blocks [2/1] [U_] > > unused devices: <none> > ------------------ > > Please note that I had to run the raid in degraded mode as /dev/hdc3 > cannot be in the array (See below). > > When I do a "mdadm --assemble --scan --auto=yes" (as done in > /etc/init.d/mdadm-raid) then I get the following error: > > --- > mdadm: no recogniseable superblock on /dev/hda2 > mdadm: /dev/hda2 has wrong uuid. > mdadm: no recogniseable superblock on /dev/hda1 > mdadm: /dev/hda1 has wrong uuid. > mdadm: no recogniseable superblock on /dev/hda > mdadm: /dev/hda has wrong uuid. > mdadm: no RAID superblock on /dev/hdd2 > mdadm: /dev/hdd2 has wrong uuid. > mdadm: no RAID superblock on /dev/hdd1 > mdadm: /dev/hdd1 has wrong uuid. > mdadm: no RAID superblock on /dev/hdd > mdadm: /dev/hdd has wrong uuid. > mdadm: no RAID superblock on /dev/hdc2 > mdadm: /dev/hdc2 has wrong uuid. > mdadm: no RAID superblock on /dev/hdc1 > mdadm: /dev/hdc1 has wrong uuid. > mdadm: no RAID superblock on /dev/vg1/lv_hathi > mdadm: /dev/vg1/lv_hathi has wrong uuid. > mdadm: no RAID superblock on /dev/vg1/lv_misc > mdadm: /dev/vg1/lv_misc has wrong uuid. > mdadm: no RAID superblock on /dev/vg1/lv_mirror > mdadm: /dev/vg1/lv_mirror has wrong uuid. > mdadm: WARNING /dev/hdc3 and /dev/hdc appear to have very similar superblocks. > If they are really different, please --zero the superblock on one > If they are the same, please remove one from the list. > --- > > Cleaning the superblock of /dev/hdc also clean the one of /dev/hdc3 and > so leaving the raid in a degraded state. But at least I can now boot the > system after running the md0 by hand. > > Note that the partition /dev/hdd3 is also at the end of the disk but do > not make problemes. > > This is a very critical bug and should be fixed in etch (I think, this > is release critical!!!) -- .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
--- End Message ---
