On Thursday June 3, bugzilla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > I am sure a patch would be considered! But what do I know? > I do agree that the state should be something other than "clean, no-errors"! > Maybe: > "clean, no-errors, degraded" > Or > "clean, no-errors, degraded, recovering" Good suggestion. It will be in the next release of mdadm (due out shortly). The "no-errors" will be gone though. It doesn't mean anything. > > Not even sure it's clean if a disk is missing. The parity can't be up to > date! Well.... the parity had better be up-to-date, or you have data corruption. When an array is running, the kernel will maintain sufficient state that it always knows what should be where, but the data actually on disk may be "clean" or not. If you crash with a non-clean array with a failed disk, then you loose data (and need --assemble --force to restart the array). > Also seems like a missing disk would be an error! No, a degradation. 2 missing disks in a raid5 would be a failure. I don't report that yet. NeilBrown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
