Re: Weirdness with DDF arrays (mdadm 3.3)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Martin Wilck <mwilck@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 09/16/2013 03:47 PM, Francis Moreau wrote:
> [...]
>
>>>>> Wrt loop1[2], I think you interpret the [2] wrongly. It seems to be the
>>>>> kernel index of the device somehow. The mdstat parsing code of mdadm
>>>>> doesn't look at this number. If you look at
>>>>> /sys/class/block/md124/md/dev-loop*/slot, the number should be correct -
>>>>> I tried it here.
>>>>
>>>> Well I think I interpreted the numbers the way it's described here :
>>>>
>>>> https://raid.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Mdstat#md_device_line
>>>
>>> That description is not quite correct. The number in brackets [2] means
>>> the index of the disk in the meta data (for DDF, that's the index in the
>>> "physical disks" table of the container). That number isn't very
>>> meaningful except for the meta data itself.
>>>
>>> The logical disk index is represented by the "slot" attribute in sysfs.
>>>
>>> See e.g.
>>> http://lxr.missinglinkelectronics.com/linux+*/drivers/md/md.h#L79
>>>
>>> The number displayed in /proc/mdstat is "desc_nr", while the number that
>>> actually matters is "raid_disk".
>>
>> Maybe the description in the wiki is correct but there's a bun in the
>> kernel which displays the wrong number ?
>>
>> If "desc_nr" isn't meaningful, I don't see the point to show it in
>> /proc/mdstat.
>
> Well, we could propose to change the value displayed by the kernel. The
> question is whether the kernel maintainers would allow that, because it
> would change the kernel-userspace API. mdadm itself doesn't look at this
> number, but other tools might, so there is some small but non-zero risk
> of breaking something somewhere.

Well I was assuming that the API was described by:
https://raid.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Mdstat#md_device_line rather
than looking at the source code. I haven't found other documentation
for a description of /proc/mdstat BTW.

Plus the fact that "desc_nr" isn't really meaningful.

>
> Let's wait what others have to say.
>

Agreed.

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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux