Kelina wrote:
> Correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't the standard rh6.0 (and 6.1 kernel for
> that matter) use old style raid?
If you mean the version that uses the older tools (i.e. mdadd, mdrun, etc) then
no. I have 6.0 on a box running a RAID-5 array and one of the last messages
during a shu
"Roeland M.J. Meyer" wrote:
> But that is not the ONLY underscore;
> Please note the name "read_ahead".
So grep for an underscore with a [ or a U in front of it:
grep '[\[U]_' /proc/mdstat
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
There's even a parody for people opposed to huntin
Pavel Chytil wrote:
> kernel: EXT2-fs warning: mounting unchecked fs, running e2fsck is recommended
> kernel: EXT2-fs error (device md(9,0)): ext2_check_blocks_bitmap: Wrong free
Have you followed the suggestion and run an e2fsck on the device before
mounting?
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/En
Michael Marion wrote:
Arg. I meant to ask first:
Is this bug known to be present in the raid code that comes with Redhat 6.0
(2.2.12-20 kernel) with raidtools-0.90? Or is it only in the newer raid
patches?
> Any idea if there's a way to test for this bug? Considering I just bumped m
Martin Weinberg wrote:
> I plopped in an older 2940UW, rebuilt the raid device and the
> problem was gone. A fix for the U2W was proposed by Justin
> Gibbs, and I have a patch from Tor Egge. Doug Ledford posted a
> more recent patch in the kernel group (search for FIFOEMP in
> dejanews).
Any i
David Cooley wrote:
> It's probably something to do with the fact that I'm on a Sparc Ultra 2
> machine running Linux.
> Didn't think Linux saw the drives differently between platforms, but I
> guess it does.
I'm guessing the drives were orginally used under Solaris/SunOS? i.e. they had
a Sun d