Heinz,
Tried running dmraid rc10 against the raid45 kernel module on 2.6.15
kernel and noticed a couple of problems, the table passed in appears
to have an additional parameter (looks to be caused by a typo) and
another problem where the raid45 module expects the #sectors to be
divisible by #raid_devs -1 . I was using isw raid device in this case.
Patches attached. Thanks,
Ramesh.
diff -c lib/activate/activate.c ../../../1.0.0.rc10/lib/activate/activate.c
*** lib/activate/activate.c 2006-02-17 11:09:31.000000000 -0800
--- ../../../1.0.0.rc10/lib/activate/activate.c 2006-03-15
17:18:41.000000000 -0800
***************
*** 411,417 ****
struct raid_set *rs,
uint64_t sectors, unsigned int members)
{
! return (p_fmt(lc, table, "0 %U %s core 2 %u %s %s %u %u %u %u %u",
sectors, get_dm_type(lc, t_raid5),
2048, /*calc_region_size(lc, sectors),*/
(S_INCONSISTENT(rs->status) || S_NOSYNC(rs->status)) ?
--- 411,417 ----
struct raid_set *rs,
uint64_t sectors, unsigned int members)
{
! return (p_fmt(lc, table, "0 %U %s core 2 %u %s %s %u %u %u %u ",
sectors, get_dm_type(lc, t_raid5),
2048, /*calc_region_size(lc, sectors),*/
(S_INCONSISTENT(rs->status) || S_NOSYNC(rs->status)) ?
***************
*** 428,434 ****
if (!(sectors = _smallest(lc, rs, 0)))
LOG_ERR(lc, 0, "can't find smallest RAID5 member!");
!
if (!_dm_raid45_bol(lc, table, rs, sectors, members))
goto err;
--- 428,435 ----
if (!(sectors = _smallest(lc, rs, 0)))
LOG_ERR(lc, 0, "can't find smallest RAID5 member!");
! sectors &= (uint64_t)(-1) -1;
!
if (!_dm_raid45_bol(lc, table, rs, sectors, members))
goto err;
_______________________________________________
Ataraid-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list
