On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Francis Moreau <francis.moro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
>>
>> I think this patch will help. The last hunk in particular should make the
>> difference.
>>
>> Please let me know if it fixes the problem.
>>
>
> Yes it fixes the problem.
>
> I had to adjust the patch to make it compile by using be64_to_cpu()
> where needed.
>
Hmm unfortunately the following test case seems broken too, I'm not
sure it's related however:
# create a ddf array containing loop0 and loop1
$ cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1]
md124 : active raid1 loop0[1] loop1[0]
84416 blocks super external:/md125/0 [2/2] [UU]
md125 : inactive loop1[1](S) loop0[0](S)
65536 blocks super external:ddf
# stop the array
$ mdadm --stop /dev/md124
mdadm: stopped /dev/md124
$ mdadm --stop /dev/md125
mdadm: stopped /dev/md125
# Add only one disk
$ mdadm -I /dev/loop0
mdadm: container /dev/md/ddf1 now has 1 device
mdadm: /dev/md/array1 assembled with 1 device but not started
# start the array
$ mdadm -R /dev/md124
# looks like it failed
$ cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1]
md124 : inactive loop0[0]
84416 blocks super external:/md125/0
md125 : inactive loop0[0](S)
32768 blocks super external:ddf
# start mdmon manually with debug trace
$ mdmon /dev/md125
starting mdmon for md125
monitor: wake ( )
no arrays to monitor... exiting
--
Francis
--
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
