Re: MDADM Software Raid Woes

["Dylan Taft" <d13f00l@gmail.com>]

I'm running gentoo, udev 124-r1
I cleared all superblocks on all devices I raided, and undid all the
partition tables, and started from scratch, putting the filesystem on
the raid devices themselves instead of partitioning the raid devices.

Everything is working now, I think it's probably best to keep it
simple, or use LVM
MD is referenced in the udev config files, but everything is working now.

Sorry, I think it was user error. :)
Thanks
Dylan

On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 3:06 PM, NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> wrote:
> On Fri, December 19, 2008 12:08 am, Dylan Taft wrote:
>> I may give that a shot.
>>
>> But it also looks like my major numbers are wrong on the actual device
>> nodes?
>> brw-r-----  1 root disk   9, 0 Dec 17 19:13 0
>> brw-r-----  1 root disk 259, 0 Dec 17 19:13 1
>> brw-r-----  1 root disk 259, 1 Dec 17 19:13 2
>> brw-r-----  1 root disk 259, 2 Dec 17 19:13 3
>>
>> Shouldn't this be 9,something, not 259?
>>
>> If I change the partition type from fd to something else, and don't
>> allow the kernel to auto assemble, then assemble manually via mdadm,
>> things work right.
>> Any idea what could cause thee major numbers to be wrong?
>
> Almost certainly some udev configuration going wrong.
> What distro are you running?
> Is there are file in /lib/udev/rules.d or /etc/udev/rules.d with 'md'
> in the name?  What is in that file?
>
> Prior to 2.6.28, normal md devices (major number 9) could not be
> partitioned. You needed to use "mdp" devices (major number close to 254).
> To get autodetect to create these use the kernel parameter
> "raid=partitionable".
>
> In 2.6.28, partitions don't have to have the same major number as the
> base device.
> In you case,
>  md0 is 9,0
>  md1 is 9,1
>
>  md1p1 is 259,0
>  md1p2 is 259.1
>  md1p3 is 259,2
>
> as you can see, the device nodes have been created with the wrong
> name.  In each case the name used is md followed by the last digit
> of what should have been used.  udev is the only thing that could have
> done that.
>
> Hence my questions about your distro and udev configuration.
>
> NeilBrown
>
>