On Tue, 28 May 2013 13:50:49 +0300 Alexander Lyakas <alex.bolshoy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Neil, > In my opinion (I may be wrong), a spare drive (raid_disk==-1) doesn't > add any information to array assembly. It doesn't have a valid raid > slot, and I don't see how its event count is relevant. I don't think a > spare can help us much in figuring out array's latest state, which is > what assembly code tries to do. > So what I was thinking: mdadm --assemble doesn't consider spare drives > (raid_disk=-1) at all. It simply skips over them in the initial loop > after reading their superblocks. Perhaps it can keep them in a side > list. Then array is assembled with non-spare drives only. > > After array is assembled, we may choose one of the following: > # User has to explicitly add the spare drives after array has been > assembled. Assemble can warn that some spares have been left out, and > tell the user what they are. > # Assemble adds the spare drives (perhaps after zeroing their > superblocks even), after it assembled the array with non-spare drives. Hi, I have just committed http://git.neil.brown.name/?p=mdadm.git;a=commitdiff;h=f80057aec5d314798251e318555cb8ac92e4c06f which I believe fixes this issue. If you can test and confirm I would appreciate it. NeilBrown
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
