Hello list
I removed sda from the system and I confirmed /dev/sda did not exist any
more.
After some time an I/O was issued to the array and sda6 was failed by MD
in /dev/md5:
md5 : active raid1 sdb6[2] sda6[0](F)
10485688 blocks super 1.0 [2/1] [_U]
bitmap: 1/160 pages [4KB], 32KB chunk
At this point I tried:
mdadm /dev/md5 --remove detached
--> no effect !
mdadm /dev/md5 --remove failed
--> no effect !
mdadm /dev/md5 --remove /dev/sda6
--> mdadm: cannot find /dev/sda6: No such file or directory (!!!)
mdadm /dev/md5 --remove sda6
--> finally worked ! (I don't know how I had the idea to actually try
this...)
Then here is another array:
md1 : active raid1 sda2[0] sdb2[2]
10485688 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
bitmap: 0/1 pages [0KB], 65536KB chunk
This one did not even realize that sda was removed from the system long ago.
Apparently only when an I/O is issued, mdadm realizes the drive is not
there anymore.
I am wondering (and this would be very serious) what happens if a new
drives is inserted and it takes the /dev/sda identifier!? Would MD start
writing or do any operation THERE!?
There is another problem...
I tried to make MD realize that the drive is detached:
mdadm /dev/md1 --fail detached
--> no effect !
however:
ls /dev/sda2
--> ls: cannot access /dev/sda2: No such file or directory
so "detached" also seems broken...
And here goes also a feature request:
if a device is detached from the system, (echo 1 > device/delete or
removing via hardware hot-swap + AHCI) MD should detect this situation
and mark the device (and all its partitions) as failed in all arrays, or
even remove the device completely from the RAID.
In my case I have verified that MD did not realize the device was
removed from the system, and only much later when an I/O was issued to
the disk, it would mark the device as failed in the RAID.
After the above is implemented, it could be an idea to actually allow a
new disk to take the place of a failed disk automatically if that would
be a "re-add" (probably the same failed disk is being reinserted by the
operator) and this even if the array is running, and especially if there
is a bitmap.
Now it doesn't happen:
When I reinserted the disk, udev triggered the --incremental, to
reinsert the device, but mdadm refused to do anything because the old
slot was still occupied with a failed+detached device. I manually
removed the device from the raid then I ran --incremental, but mdadm
still refused to re-add the device to the RAID because the array was
running. I think that if it is a re-add, and especially if the bitmap is
active, I can't think of a situation in which the user would *not* want
to do an incremental re-add even if the array is running.
Thank you
Asdo
--
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
