On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 07:22:17 +0200 Anssi Hannula <anssi.hannula@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 5:01 AM, NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 09:03:14 +0200 Anssi Hannula <anssi.hannula@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> After I rebooted during a raid6 rebuild, the rebuild didn't start again.
> >> Instead, there is a flood of "RAID conf printout"s that seemingly happen
> >> on array activity.
> >>
> >> All the devices show up properly in --detail and two devices are marked
> >> as "spare rebuilding", and I can access the contents of the array just
> >> fine, but the rebuild doesn't actually start. Is this a bug or am I
> >> missing something? :)
> >>
> >> I was initially on 2.6.38.8, but also tried 3.1.4 which seems to have
> >> the same issue. mdadm is 3.1.5.
> >>
> >> I'm not using start_ro and writing to the array doesn't trigger a
> >> rebuild either.
> >>
> >> Attached are --examine outputs before assembly, kernel log output on
> >> assembly, /proc/mdstat and --detail after assembly (on 3.1.4).
> >>
> >
> > Thank you for the very detailed problem report.
>
> Thanks for the quick response :)
>
> > Unfortunately it is a complete mystery to me what is happening.
> >
> > The repeated "RAID conf printout" messages are almost certainly coming from
> > the end of raid5_remove_disk.
> > It is being called from remove_and_add_spares for each of the two devices
> > that are being rebuilt. raid5_remove_disk declines to remove them because it
> > can keep rebuilding them.
> >
> > remove_and_add_spares then counts them and notes there are 2.
> > md_check_recovery notes that this is > 0, so it should create a thread to run
> > md_do_sync.
> >
> > md_do_sync should then print out a message like
> > md: recovery of RAID array md0
> >
> > but it doesn't. So something went wrong.
> > There are three reasons that md_do_sync might not print a message:
> >
> > 1/ MD_RECOVERY_DONE is set. As only md_do_sync ever sets it, that is
> > unlikely, and in any case md_check_recovery clears it.
> > 2/ mddev->ro != 0. It is only ever set to 0, 1, or 2. If it is 1 or 2
> > then we would be able to see that in /proc/mdstat as a "(readonly)"
> > status. But we don't.
> > 3/ MD_RECOVERY_INTR is set. Again, md_check_recovery clears this. It does
> > get set if kthread_should_stop() returns 'true', but that should only
> > happen if kthread_stop() was called. That is only called by
> > md_unregister_thread and I cannot see any way that could be call.
> >
> > So. No idea.
> >
> > Are you compiling these kernels yourself?
>
> Nope (used Mageia kernels), but I did now (3.1.5).
>
> > If so, could you:
> > - put a printk in the top of md_do_sync to report the values of
> > mddev->recovery and mddev->ro
> > - print a message whenever md_unregister_thread is called
> > - in md_check_recovery, in the
> > if (mddev->ro) {
> > /* Only thing we do on a ro array is remove
> > * failed devices.
> > */
> > mdk_rdev_t *rdev;
> >
> > in statement, print the value of mddev->ro.
> >
> > Then see which of those printk's fire, and what they tell us.
>
> Only the last one does, and mddev->ro == 0.
>
> For reference, attached is the used patch and resulting log output.
>
Thanks.
So it isn't running md_do_sync at all. Odd.
Could please add:
- call "WARN_ON(1);" in print_raid5_conf() so we get a stack trace and can
see who is calling it.
- print the value that remove_and_add_spares is going to return.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
