Bill Davidsen wrote:
John Robinson wrote:
On 01/02/2010 20:46, Bill Davidsen wrote:
John Robinson wrote:
On 15/01/2010 23:58, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
I am trying to update my kernel from 2.6.26.8 to the current .32.
[...]
Starting with .28 I am getting an error about unknown partition
table for all 3 md's. md0 is boot and main programs, md1 is swap,
md2 is mostly recordings storage for vdr. All 3 are raid 1 and
raid is built in.
Your md devices aren't partitioned so you can quite safely ignore
the warning. See also
http://marc.info/?l=linux-raid&m=125797242110594&w=2
To clarify that a bit, the kernel can use several partition formats,
and something in the partitions looks like a partition table but not
a *valid* partition table. So the kernel warns that it doesn't
recognize the table.
I suspect that using a different superblock type would change
(probably eliminate) this, putting the md information at the start
of the partition, of in a bit or whatever makes the kernel happy.
The kernel would make us happy if it checked for a valid md
superblock at the *end* of the partition, but there may be reasons
why that's undesirable.
Finally, I'm less willing than John to say you can ignore it, any
time something comes close enough to working (in an undesired way)
to generate an error message, if there's a simple way to be sure the
kernel doesn't try to use random data as a partition table, you
might well want to take a step to prevent a problem now.
I believe it arises out of all arrays being partitionable recently,
again the details don't come to mid, I've been pretty head down on
another project since November.
I don't think this analysis is correct. Yes, the situation has arisen
out of all arrays - in fact all block devices - being partitionable,
but the warning's not because of something that looks like a dodgy
partition table, it is precisely what it says, a statement that the
device does not contain a valid partition table. I am essentially
repeating the contents of Doug Ledford's earlier post to this list,
to which I referred above.
But the question is, *should* it contain a valid partition table, or
even anything which looks enough like a partition table to have the
kernel look at it hard enough to think it's invalid? I have several
devices on one system which contain essentially random data, and I
don't see this, so I assume that my data never looks enough like a
partition table to trigger this. At least to 2.6.33-rc6, which I did
boot.
On reflection I may not have said this clearly. I have block devices
which do not have partition tables and which do not trigger this
message. Therefore something is triggering this message, beyond the lack
of a partition table. My thought is that it may be some logic called
when the array is assembled, and some data on the array.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
"We can't solve today's problems by using the same thinking we
used in creating them." - Einstein
--
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
