Hi,
Software Raid does not work on the standard 2.2.9 Kernel
I have not yet found patches to get it to run correctly.
Regards
Andrew
On Sun, 13 Jun 1999, Marc Duponcheel wrote:
> Sorry raid-ers if this is a RTMF (which I did) ... I just
> subscribed to this list.
>
>
> I use raidtools-19990421-0.90
> I run 2.2.9 with (I believe) proper support for md and its
> personalities:
>
> root@tecra-brew:~ $ [bash] cat /proc/mdstat
> Personalities : [1 linear] [2 raid0] [3 raid1] [4 raid5]
> read_ahead not set
> md0 : inactive
> md1 : inactive
> md2 : inactive
> md3 : inactive
>
>
> I have an old 4pack Sun SCSI (4x1Gb) box which looks to me like
> a great candidate to try out RAID0:
>
> root@tecra-brew:~ $ [bash] cat /proc/scsi/scsi
> Attached devices:
> Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00
> Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST11200N SUN1.05 Rev: 9500
> Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
> Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 01 Lun: 00
> Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST11200N SUN1.05 Rev: 9500
> Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
> Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 02 Lun: 00
> Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST11200N SUN1.05 Rev: 9500
> Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
> Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 05 Lun: 00
> Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST11200N SUN1.05 Rev: 9500
> Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
>
>
> The disks work well (over PCMCIA as sd{a,b,c,d}). Here is the raidtab:
>
> root@tecra-brew:~ $ [bash] cat /etc/raidtab
> raiddev /dev/md0
> raid-level 0
>
> persistent-superblock 0
> chunk-size 16
> nr-raid-disks 4
> nr-spare-disks 0
>
> device /dev/sda1
> raid-disk 0
>
> device /dev/sdb1
> raid-disk 1
>
> device /dev/sdc1
> raid-disk 2
>
> device /dev/sdd1
> raid-disk 3
>
>
> But mkraid complains ...
>
> root@tecra-brew:~ $ [bash] mkraid /dev/md0
> handling MD device /dev/md0
> analyzing super-block
> mkraid: aborted, see the syslog and /proc/mdstat for potential clues.
>
> I ran this on gdb and straced it and both show me that
> the ioctl SET_ARRAY_INFO on fd of /dev/md0 fails. strace prints:
>
> open("/dev/md0", O_RDONLY) = 4
> ioctl(4, 0x40480923, 0x804fa90) = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
>
> Is this some kind of known issue?
> Thanks for your valuable time spent reading this.
>
> --
> Greetings,
>
> -- Cisco Systems CATS Team TAC Brussels --
> Marc Duponcheel [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: +32 2 704 52 40
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Cameron
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
