On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Kristleifur Daðason <kristleifur@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 4:10 AM, Michael Evans <mjevans1983@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 7:41 PM, Kristleifur Daðason >> <kristleifur@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I wish to convert my 3-drive RAID-5 array to a 6-drive RAID-6. I'm on >>> Linux 2.6.32.2 and have mdadm version 3.1.1 with the 32-bit-array-size >>> patch from here: http://osdir.com/ml/linux-raid/2009-11/msg00534.html >>> >>> I have three live drives and three spares added to the array. When I >>> initialize the command, mdadm does the initial checks and aborts with >>> a "cannot set device shape" without doing anything to the array. >>> >>> Following are some md stats and growth command output: >>> >>> ___ >>> >>> $ cat /proc/mdstat >>> Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] >>> [raid4] [raid10] >>> md_d1 : active raid5 sdd1[6](S) sdc1[5](S) sdb1[4](S) sdf1[1] sde1[0] sdl1[3] >>> 2930078720 blocks super 1.1 level 5, 256k chunk, algorithm 2 [3/3] [UUU] >>> bitmap: 1/350 pages [4KB], 2048KB chunk >>> >>> $ mdadm --detail --scan >>> ARRAY /dev/md/d1 metadata=1.01 spares=3 name=mamma:d1 >>> UUID=da547022:042a6f68:d5fe251e:5e89f263 >>> >>> $ mdadm --grow /dev/md_d1 --level=6 --raid-devices=6 >>> --backup-file=/root/backup.md1_to_r6 >>> mdadm: metadata format 1.10 unknown, ignored. >>> mdadm: metadata format 1.10 unknown, ignored. >>> mdadm level of /dev/md_d1 changed to raid6 >>> mdadm: Need to backup 1024K of critical section.. >>> mdadm: Cannot set device shape for /dev/md_d1 >>> mdadm: aborting level change >>> ___ >>> >>> >>> Three questions - >>> >>> 1. What does the stuff about "metadata format 1.10 unknown" mean? >>> Notice the "super 1.1" vs. "metadata 1.01" vs. "metadata format 1.10" >>> disrepancy between mdsat, --detail and --grow output. >>> >>> 2. Am I doing something wrong? :) >>> >>> 3. How can I get more info about what is causing the failure to >>> initialize the growth? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> -- Kristleifur >>> >>> >>> (P.s., I'm cc-ing this directly to Neil Brown as the maintainer of >>> mdadm. I hope that isn't rude of me.) >>> -- >> >> >> I thought there were three metadata variants for 1.x: 1.0 1.1 and 1.2 >> Maybe the extra 1 or 0 at the end refers to a reshape in progress? >> > > Thanks for the reply. FWIW, I intended the array to have metadata > format 1.1 when I created it. I've noticed these "1.01" messages > before, so I believe it's not due to the reshape. However, I'm > thinking the funny metadata might be interfering with the reshape > somehow. > > Hmm ... > This is odd; cat /proc/mdstat shows 1.0 and 1.1 for my metadata formats; however using --detail --scan I _DO_ see 1.00 and 1.01 on my system. -- 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
