This bug is awaiting verification that the kernel in -proposed solves
the problem. Please test the kernel and update this bug with the
results. If the problem is solved, change the tag 'verification-needed-
bionic' to 'verification-done-bionic'. If the problem still exists,
change the tag 'verification-needed-bionic' to 'verification-failed-
bionic'.

If verification is not done by 5 working days from today, this fix will
be dropped from the source code, and this bug will be closed.

See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how
to enable and use -proposed. Thank you!


** Tags added: verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1849682

Title:
  [REGRESSION]  md/raid0: cannot assemble multi-zone RAID0 with
  default_layout setting

Status in linux package in Ubuntu:
  Incomplete
Status in linux source package in Bionic:
  Fix Committed
Status in linux source package in Disco:
  Incomplete
Status in linux source package in Eoan:
  Incomplete
Status in linux source package in Focal:
  Incomplete

Bug description:
  Users of RAID0 arrays are susceptible to a corruption issue if:
   - The members of the RAID array are not all the same size[*]
   - Data has been written to the array while running kernels < 3.14 *and* >= 
3.14.

  This is because of an change in v3.14 that accidentally changed how data was 
written - as described in the upstream commit message:
  
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/c84a1372df929033cb1a0441fb57bd3932f39ac9

  To summarize, upstream is dealing with this by adding a versioned
  layout in v5.4, and that is being backported to stable kernels - which
  is why we're now seeing it. Layout version 1 is the pre-3.14 layout,
  version 2 is post 3.14. Mixing version 1 & version 2 layouts can cause
  corruption. However, unless a layout-version-aware kernel *created*
  the array, there's no way for the kernel to know which version(s) was
  used to write the existing data. This undefined mode is considered
  "Version 0", and the kernel will now refuse to start these arrays w/o
  user intervention.

  The user experience is pretty awful here. A user upgrades to the next
  SRU and all of a sudden their system stops at an (initramfs) prompt. A
  clueful user can spot something like the following in dmesg:

  Here's the message which , as you can see from the log in Comment #1,
  is hidden in a ton of other messages:

  [ 72.720232] md/raid0:md0: cannot assemble multi-zone RAID0 with 
default_layout setting
  [ 72.728149] md/raid0: please set raid.default_layout to 1 or 2
  [ 72.733979] md: pers->run() failed ...
  mdadm: failed to start array /dev/md0: Unknown error 524

  What that is trying to say is that you should determine if your data -
  specifically the data toward the end of your array - was most likely
  written with a pre-3.14 or post-3.14 kernel. Based on that, reboot
  with the kernel parameter raid0.default_layout=1 or
  raid0.default_layout=2 on the kernel command line. And note it should
  be *raid0.default_layout* not *raid.default_layout* as the message
  says - a fix for that message is now queued for stable:

  
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/3874d73e06c9b9dc15de0b7382fc223986d75571)

  IMHO, we should work with upstream to create a web page that clearly
  walks the user through this process, and update the error message to
  point to that page. I'd also like to see if we can detect this problem
  *before* the user reboots (debconf?) and help the user fix things.
  e.g. "We detected that you have RAID0 arrays that maybe susceptible to
  a corruption problem", guide the user to choosing a layout, and update
  the mdadm initramfs hook to poke the answer in via sysfs before
  starting the array on reboot.

  Note that it also seems like we should investigate backporting this to
  < 3.14 kernels. Imagine a user switching between the trusty HWE kernel
  and the GA kernel.

  References from users of other distros:
  https://blog.icod.de/2019/10/10/caution-kernel-5-3-4-and-raid0-default_layout/
  
https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/raid-arrays-not-assembling-4175662774/

  [*] Which surprisingly is not the case reported in this bug - the user
  here had a raid0 of 8 identically-sized devices. I suspect there's a
  bug in the detection code somewhere.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1849682/+subscriptions

-- 
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages
Post to     : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Reply via email to