On 10/17/07, Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Mike Snitzer wrote: > > mdadm 2.4.1 through 2.5.6 works. mdadm-2.6's "Improve allocation and > > use of space for bitmaps in version1 metadata" > > (199171a297a87d7696b6b8c07ee520363f4603c1) would seem like the > > offending change. Using 1.2 metdata works. > > > > I get the following using the tip of the mdadm git repo or any other > > version of mdadm 2.6.x: > > > > # mdadm --create /dev/md2 --run -l 1 --metadata=1.0 --bitmap=internal > > -n 2 /dev/sdf --write-mostly /dev/nbd2 > > mdadm: /dev/sdf appears to be part of a raid array: > > level=raid1 devices=2 ctime=Wed Oct 17 10:17:31 2007 > > mdadm: /dev/nbd2 appears to be part of a raid array: > > level=raid1 devices=2 ctime=Wed Oct 17 10:17:31 2007 > > mdadm: RUN_ARRAY failed: Input/output error > > mdadm: stopped /dev/md2 > > > > kernel log shows: > > md2: bitmap initialized from disk: read 22/22 pages, set 715290 bits, status: 0 > > created bitmap (350 pages) for device md2 > > md2: failed to create bitmap (-5) > > md: pers->run() failed ... > > md: md2 stopped. > > md: unbind<nbd2> > > md: export_rdev(nbd2) > > md: unbind<sdf> > > md: export_rdev(sdf) > > md: md2 stopped. > > > > I would start by retrying with an external bitmap, to see if for some > reason there isn't room for the bitmap. If that fails, perhaps no bitmap > at all would be a useful data point. Was the original metadata the same > version? Things moved depending on the exact version, and some > --zero-superblock magic might be needed. Hopefully Neil can clarify, I'm > just telling you what I suspect is the problem, and maybe a > non-destructive solution. Creating with an external bitmap works perfectly fine. As does creating without a bitmap. --zero-superblock hasn't helped. Metadata v1.1 and v1.2 works with an internal bitmap. I'd like to use v1.0 with an internal bitmap (using an external bitmap isn't an option for me). It does appear that the changes to sb super1.c aren't leaving adequate room for the bitmap. Looking at the relevant diff for v1.0 metadata the newer super1.c code makes use of a larger bitmap (128K) for devices > 200GB. My blockdevice is 700GB. So could the larger blockdevice possibly explain why others haven't noticed this? Mike - 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
