[continues at bottom] On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 09:41:56AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > > > In doing some tests with an 8-port Supermicro/Marvell-based SATA controller > > (works fine so far) and some Hitachi 3TB disks, I've run into an odd > > problem. One of the disks failed in burn-in, so the RAID5 went into > > degraded mode. In replacing the failed disk, I managed to bugger it up; not > > so awful since it's a test rig and I needed to create 2 smaller arrays for > > some testing. > > > > > > In trying to do that, I was able to create the first 4-disk RAID5 fine and > > it's now initializing, but the second fails with the following error: > > > > > > $ mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md1 --level=5 --raid-devices=4 > > /dev/sd[fghi]1 > > mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric > > mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric > > mdadm: chunk size defaults to 512K > > mdadm: /dev/sdf1 appears to be part of a raid array: > > level=raid5 devices=7 ctime=Fri Sep 30 17:47:19 2011 > > mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric > > mdadm: super1.x cannot open /dev/sdg1: Device or resource busy > > mdadm: /dev/sdg1 is not suitable for this array. > > mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric > > mdadm: /dev/sdh1 appears to be part of a raid array: > > level=raid5 devices=7 ctime=Fri Sep 30 17:47:19 2011 > > mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric > > mdadm: create aborted > > > > > > mdstat implies that one of the disks still belongs to the previous RAID5: > > > > > > $ cat /proc/mdstat > > Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] > > [raid10] > > md0 : active raid5 sde1[4] sdd1[2] sdc1[1] sdb1[0] > > 6442438656 blocks super 1.2 level 5, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] > > [UUU_] > > [========>............] recovery = 40.1% (861382528/2147479552) > > finish=292.9min speed=73167K/sec > > > > md_d0 : inactive sdg1[5](S) > > 2147480704 blocks > > > > unused devices: <none> > > > > > > > > > > but I can't seem to convince md_d0 to surrender this device. This behavior > > survives a reboot. > > > > > > One wrinkle is that the original RAID was made with the default mdadm from > > Ubuntu 10.04.3 (2.6.7.1) and the smaller RAID5 above was created with the > > latest mdadm (v3.2.2). > > > > > > What do I have to do to free this device? > > Doesn't > > mdadm --stop /dev/md_d0 > > release sdg1 ?? > > NeilBrown No, it doesn't. $ mdadm --stop /dev/md_d0 mdadm: error opening /dev/md_d0: No such file or directory In fact, that's sort of odd: $ ls -l /dev/md* brw-rw---- 1 root disk 9, 0 2011-10-20 17:18 /dev/md0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 2011-10-20 17:05 /dev/md_d0p1 -> md/d0p1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 2011-10-20 17:05 /dev/md_d0p2 -> md/d0p2 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 2011-10-20 17:05 /dev/md_d0p3 -> md/d0p3 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 2011-10-20 17:05 /dev/md_d0p4 -> md/d0p4 /dev/md: total 0 brw------- 1 root root 254, 0 2011-10-20 17:05 d0 brw------- 1 root root 254, 1 2011-10-20 17:05 d0p1 brw------- 1 root root 254, 2 2011-10-20 17:05 d0p2 brw------- 1 root root 254, 3 2011-10-20 17:05 d0p3 brw------- 1 root root 254, 4 2011-10-20 17:05 d0p4 [no record of /dev/md_d0] ...? hjm -- 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
