On Friday 03 October 2008 00.47.23 Kay Sievers wrote: > Likely, that volume_id needs a fix. I never really tested with a real > ddf volume. > > What udev version are you running? 0.125-7 But I downloaded 0.129 yesterday and compiled it (I cannot install it system-wide, as I'm not that expert to know what stuff needs to be copied where, and I don't want to break this system). I tried to run udevadm and vol_id from the place of the compilation, the former didn't work, the latter gave the same result as in the 0.125 version: # ./udev-129/udev/udevadm info --query=all --name=sda device node not found # ./udev-129/extras/volume_id/vol_id /dev/sda2 ID_FS_USAGE=filesystem ID_FS_TYPE=ext3 ID_FS_VERSION=1.0 ID_FS_UUID=db631065-7ca8-45fc-bf60-a9259a732dec ID_FS_UUID_ENC=db631065-7ca8-45fc-bf60-a9259a732dec ID_FS_LABEL= ID_FS_LABEL_ENC= ID_FS_LABEL_SAFE= > Is this an Adaptec controller? Yes, it's their simplest 2-port card, model name 1220SA I think. It has a Silicon Image chip on it, the kernel use the sata_sil24 driver to reach the drives. > Can you send me a copy of the sectors containing the ddf header? Along > with the exact dd commandline you used to extract it, so can copy it > to a drive and test it. Attached. I hope I did the right thing. I got the offset and size with dmraid's help (dumping raid metadata). So these dd commands resulted the same files as dmraid -rD: dd if=/dev/sda of=sda_ddf1.dat bs=1 count=6144 skip=200048559616 dd if=/dev/sdb of=sdb_ddf1.dat bs=1 count=6144 skip=200049641472 (As I wrote, because one disk has a HPA, the offsets do differ.) Thanks, Peter
Attachment:
sda_ddf1.dat
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
sdb_ddf1.dat
Description: Binary data
