Martin, On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Francis Moreau <francis.moro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 12:38 PM, NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:35:47 +0200 Francis Moreau <francis.moro@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: [...] >> >> BTW I think I've fixed the issue with mdadm -R /dev/md125 for DDF. >> Try the latest git. > > It seems it fixes the issue: mdmon is now correctly started with a > degraded DDF array. > > However, after using the system with only one disk (sda), sdb is now > outdated. I rebooted the system with 2 disks but mdadm doesn't seem to > notice that sdb is outdated: > > # mdadm -I /dev/sda > mdadm: container /dev/md/ddf0 now has 1 device > mdadm: /dev/md/array1_0 assembled with 1 device but not started > # mdadm -I /dev/sdb > mdadm: container /dev/md/ddf0 now has 2 devices > mdadm: Started /dev/md/array1_0 with 2 devices (1 new) > # cat /proc/mdstat > Personalities : [raid1] > md126 : active (auto-read-only) raid1 sdb[1] sda[0] > 2064384 blocks super external:/md127/0 [2/2] [UU] > > md127 : inactive sdb[1](S) sda[0](S) > 65536 blocks super external:ddf > > So this time mdadm fails to kick out non fresh disk (when using '-I') > but with DDF. > Maybe you have an idea on why mdadm doesn't notice that sdb is outdated in that case (DDF) ? Thanks -- 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
