> -----Original Message----- > From: Dorau, Lukasz > Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 3:23 PM > To: 'Dan Williams' > Cc: neilb@xxxxxxx; linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Labun, Marcin; Ciechanowski, > Ed; Kwolek, Adam > Subject: RE: [PATCH] imsm: fix: correct checking newly missing disks > > Pozdrawiam, > Łukasz > I apologize for the words at the beginning of the last message. They are unnecessary. It was an oversight. The right reply is of course at the end of the message. Lukasz > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx] On > Behalf > > Of Dan Williams > > Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 3:27 AM > > To: Dorau, Lukasz > > Cc: neilb@xxxxxxx; linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Labun, Marcin; Ciechanowski, > Ed > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] imsm: fix: correct checking newly missing disks > > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@xxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > > The problem occurs when RAID10 array under rebuild > > > (after one disk fails) is assembled incrementally. > > > Mdadm tries to start array just after adding the third disk > > > and the volume is assembled incorrectly (in degraded state). > > > > > > The cause is that container_enough depends on > > > newly missing disks which are checked incorrectly now. > > > They should be checked using always the first map. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Dorau <lukasz.dorau@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > super-intel.c | 4 ++-- > > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/super-intel.c b/super-intel.c > > > index 4ebee78..511a32a 100644 > > > --- a/super-intel.c > > > +++ b/super-intel.c > > > @@ -2529,13 +2529,13 @@ static void getinfo_super_imsm(struct > supertype > > *st, struct mdinfo *info, char * > > > > > > failed = imsm_count_failed(super, dev); > > > state = imsm_check_degraded(super, dev, failed); > > > - map = get_imsm_map(dev, dev->vol.migr_state); > > > + map = get_imsm_map(dev, 0); > > > > > > /* any newly missing disks? > > > * (catches single-degraded vs double-degraded) > > > */ > > > for (j = 0; j < map->num_members; j++) { > > > - __u32 ord = get_imsm_ord_tbl_ent(dev, i, -1); > > > + __u32 ord = get_imsm_ord_tbl_ent(dev, i, 0); > > > > This looks wrong. I noticed this when looking over Przemyslaw's patch [1]. > > > > map[0] always contains the destination state of the migration so the > > most reliable source for looking for out of sync disks is map[1]. > > > > I am convinced that the patch is good. > We are looking for information what was the state of array during migration > (before it was stopped), so we have to use map[0]. > map[1] contains information about the state of array before migration, which > we do not need. > > Regards, > Lukasz -- 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
