On Thu, Mar 22 2007, linux@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > 3 (I think) seperate instances of this, each involving raid5. Is your
> > array degraded or fully operational?
>
> Ding! A drive fell out the other day, which is why the problems only
> appeared recently.
>
> md5 : active raid5 sdf4[5] sdd4[3] sdc4[2] sdb4[1] sda4[0]
> 1719155200 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [6/5] [UUUU_U]
> bitmap: 149/164 pages [596KB], 1024KB chunk
>
> H'm... this means that my alarm scripts aren't working. Well, that's
> good to know. The drive is being re-integrated now.
Heh, at least something good came out of this bug then :-)
But that's reaffirming. Neil, are you following this? It smells somewhat
fishy wrt raid5.
I wonder if this triggers anything?
--- linux-2.6.20.3/block/ll_rw_blk.c~ 2007-03-22 19:59:17.128833635 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.20.3/block/ll_rw_blk.c 2007-03-22 19:59:28.850045490 +0100
@@ -1602,6 +1602,8 @@
**/
void generic_unplug_device(request_queue_t *q)
{
+ WARN_ON(irqs_disabled());
+
spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
__generic_unplug_device(q);
spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
--
Jens Axboe
-
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
