On Wednesday March 9, paul.clements@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
avoid setting of sb->events_lo = 1 when creating a 0.90 superblock -- it doesn't seem to be necessary and it was causing the event counters to start at 4 billion+ (events_lo is actually the high part of the events counter, on little endian machines anyway)
events_lo really should be the low part of the counter and it is for me.... something funny must be happening for you...
Yikes...compiling mdadm against the kernel headers. I was trying to simplify things and avoid the inevitable breakage that occurs when kernel and mdadm headers get out of sync, but alas, it's causing problems because of differences between kernel and userland header definitions...my mdadm was wrongly assuming big endian for the events counters.
if'ed out super1 definition which is now in the kernel headers
I don't like this. I don't mdadm to include the kernel raid headers.
I want it to use it's own.
Yes, I agree, see above... :/
included sys/time.h to avoid compile error
I wonder why I don't get an error.. What error do you get?
The machine I happen to be compiling on has old gcc/libc (2.91) and it's not getting the definition for one of the time structures (I forget which...).
Thanks, Paul - 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
