Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1554849 > unrolled thread

ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux

Started byJes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@gmail.com>
First post2017-01-10 02:20 +0100
Last post2017-01-11 18:00 +0100
Articles 6 — 4 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel


Contents

  ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 02:20 +0100
    Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under  Linux Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 18:50 +0100
      Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under  Linux Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 18:00 +0100
        Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under  Linux Guoqing Jiang <gqjiang@suse.com> - 2017-01-12 05:30 +0100
          Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under  Linux Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 18:00 +0100
      Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under  Linux Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org> - 2017-01-11 18:00 +0100

#1554849 — ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux

FromJes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@gmail.com>
Date2017-01-10 02:20 +0100
SubjectANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux
Message-ID<sXTgu-33k-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
I am pleased to announce the availability of
   mdadm version 4.0

It is available at the usual places:
   http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/raid/mdadm/
and via git at
   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/mdadm/mdadm.git
   http://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/mdadm/

The update in major version number primarily indicates this is a
release by it's new maintainer. In addition it contains a large number
of fixes in particular for IMSM RAID and clustered RAID support.  In
addition this release includes support for IMSM 4k sector drives,
failfast and better documentation for journaled RAID.

This is my first release of mdadm. Please thank Neil Brown for his
previous work as maintainer and blame me for all the bugs I caused
since taking over.

Jes Sorensen, 2017-01-09

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1555770 — Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux

FromBruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs@gmail.com>
Date2017-01-10 18:50 +0100
SubjectRe: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux
Message-ID<sY8Iy-4hr-33@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1554849
Jes Sorensen wrote:
> I am pleased to announce the availability of
>     mdadm version 4.0
>
> It is available at the usual places:
>     http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/raid/mdadm/
> and via git at
>     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/mdadm/mdadm.git
>     http://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/mdadm/
>
> The update in major version number primarily indicates this is a
> release by it's new maintainer. In addition it contains a large number
> of fixes in particular for IMSM RAID and clustered RAID support.  In
> addition this release includes support for IMSM 4k sector drives,
> failfast and better documentation for journaled RAID.

Thank you for the new release.  Unfortunately I get 9 failures running the 
test suite:

tests/00raid1...          FAILED
tests/07autoassemble...   FAILED
tests/07changelevels...   FAILED
tests/07revert-grow...    FAILED
tests/07revert-inplace... FAILED
tests/07testreshape5...   FAILED
tests/10ddf-fail-twice... FAILED
tests/20raid5journal...   FAILED
tests/10ddf-incremental-wrong-order...  FAILED

The procedure I used was

make
sudo ./test --keep-going --logdir=test-logs --save-logs

I'll also note that there is an irritating message when a test fails:
cp: cannot stat '/var/tmp/log': No such file or directory

This can be fixed easily enough with:
sed -i 's# if.* == "1"#& -a -e $targetdir/log#' test

I don't know if this mailing list is the right place to report bugs or 
not.  I do not want to spam the list with the logs but they are available at:

http://anduin.linuxfromscratch.org/~bdubbs/mdadm-logs/

   -- Bruce Dubbs
      linuxfromscratch.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1556718 — Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux

FromJes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@gmail.com>
Date2017-01-11 18:00 +0100
SubjectRe: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux
Message-ID<sYupI-Sq-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1555770
On 01/11/17 11:52, Shaohua Li wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:49:04AM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Jes Sorensen wrote:
>>> I am pleased to announce the availability of
>>>     mdadm version 4.0
>>>
>>> It is available at the usual places:
>>>     http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/raid/mdadm/
>>> and via git at
>>>     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/mdadm/mdadm.git
>>>     http://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/mdadm/
>>>
>>> The update in major version number primarily indicates this is a
>>> release by it's new maintainer. In addition it contains a large number
>>> of fixes in particular for IMSM RAID and clustered RAID support.  In
>>> addition this release includes support for IMSM 4k sector drives,
>>> failfast and better documentation for journaled RAID.
>>
>> Thank you for the new release.  Unfortunately I get 9 failures running the
>> test suite:
>>
>> tests/00raid1...          FAILED
>> tests/07autoassemble...   FAILED
>> tests/07changelevels...   FAILED
>> tests/07revert-grow...    FAILED
>> tests/07revert-inplace... FAILED
>> tests/07testreshape5...   FAILED
>> tests/10ddf-fail-twice... FAILED
>> tests/20raid5journal...   FAILED
>> tests/10ddf-incremental-wrong-order...  FAILED
> 
> Yep, several tests usually fail. It appears some checks aren't always good.  At
> least the 'check' function for reshape/resync isn't reliable in my test, I saw
> 07changelevelintr fails frequently.

That is my experience as well - some of them are affected by the kernel
version too. We probably need to look into making them more reliable.

I am also not sure how reliable the DDF tests are on systems without DDF
support.

Cheers,
Jes

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1557113 — Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux

FromGuoqing Jiang <gqjiang@suse.com>
Date2017-01-12 05:30 +0100
SubjectRe: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux
Message-ID<sYFbs-7MU-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1556718

On 01/12/2017 12:59 AM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> On 01/11/17 11:52, Shaohua Li wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:49:04AM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> Jes Sorensen wrote:
>>>> I am pleased to announce the availability of
>>>>      mdadm version 4.0
>>>>
>>>> It is available at the usual places:
>>>>      http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/raid/mdadm/
>>>> and via git at
>>>>      git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/mdadm/mdadm.git
>>>>      http://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/mdadm/
>>>>
>>>> The update in major version number primarily indicates this is a
>>>> release by it's new maintainer. In addition it contains a large number
>>>> of fixes in particular for IMSM RAID and clustered RAID support.  In
>>>> addition this release includes support for IMSM 4k sector drives,
>>>> failfast and better documentation for journaled RAID.
>>> Thank you for the new release.  Unfortunately I get 9 failures running the
>>> test suite:
>>>
>>> tests/00raid1...          FAILED
>>> tests/07autoassemble...   FAILED
>>> tests/07changelevels...   FAILED
>>> tests/07revert-grow...    FAILED
>>> tests/07revert-inplace... FAILED
>>> tests/07testreshape5...   FAILED
>>> tests/10ddf-fail-twice... FAILED
>>> tests/20raid5journal...   FAILED
>>> tests/10ddf-incremental-wrong-order...  FAILED
>> Yep, several tests usually fail. It appears some checks aren't always good.  At
>> least the 'check' function for reshape/resync isn't reliable in my test, I saw
>> 07changelevelintr fails frequently.
> That is my experience as well - some of them are affected by the kernel
> version too. We probably need to look into making them more reliable.

If possible, it could be a potential topic for lsf/mm raid discussion as 
Coly suggested
in previous mail.

Is current test can run the test for different raid level, say, "./test 
--raidtype=raid1" could
execute all the *r1* tests, does it make sense to do it if we don't 
support it now.

Thanks,
Guoqing

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1557614 — Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux

FromJes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@gmail.com>
Date2017-01-12 18:00 +0100
SubjectRe: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux
Message-ID<sYQTg-6jV-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1557113
On 01/11/17 23:24, Guoqing Jiang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 01/12/2017 12:59 AM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> On 01/11/17 11:52, Shaohua Li wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:49:04AM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>>> Jes Sorensen wrote:
>>>>> I am pleased to announce the availability of
>>>>>      mdadm version 4.0
>>>>>
>>>>> It is available at the usual places:
>>>>>      http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/raid/mdadm/
>>>>> and via git at
>>>>>      git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/mdadm/mdadm.git
>>>>>      http://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/mdadm/
>>>>>
>>>>> The update in major version number primarily indicates this is a
>>>>> release by it's new maintainer. In addition it contains a large number
>>>>> of fixes in particular for IMSM RAID and clustered RAID support.  In
>>>>> addition this release includes support for IMSM 4k sector drives,
>>>>> failfast and better documentation for journaled RAID.
>>>> Thank you for the new release.  Unfortunately I get 9 failures
>>>> running the
>>>> test suite:
>>>>
>>>> tests/00raid1...          FAILED
>>>> tests/07autoassemble...   FAILED
>>>> tests/07changelevels...   FAILED
>>>> tests/07revert-grow...    FAILED
>>>> tests/07revert-inplace... FAILED
>>>> tests/07testreshape5...   FAILED
>>>> tests/10ddf-fail-twice... FAILED
>>>> tests/20raid5journal...   FAILED
>>>> tests/10ddf-incremental-wrong-order...  FAILED
>>> Yep, several tests usually fail. It appears some checks aren't always
>>> good.  At
>>> least the 'check' function for reshape/resync isn't reliable in my
>>> test, I saw
>>> 07changelevelintr fails frequently.
>> That is my experience as well - some of them are affected by the kernel
>> version too. We probably need to look into making them more reliable.
> 
> If possible, it could be a potential topic for lsf/mm raid discussion as
> Coly suggested
> in previous mail.
> 
> Is current test can run the test for different raid level, say, "./test
> --raidtype=raid1" could
> execute all the *r1* tests, does it make sense to do it if we don't
> support it now.

We could have a discussion about this at LSF/MM, if someone is willing
to sponsor getting it accepted and we can get the right people there.

Note that the test suite also allows you to run all the 01 tests by
specifying ./test 01. I do like to see the test suite improved and made
more resilient.

Cheers,
Jes

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1556724 — Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux

FromShaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
Date2017-01-11 18:00 +0100
SubjectRe: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under Linux
Message-ID<sYupI-Sq-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1555770
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:49:04AM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Jes Sorensen wrote:
> > I am pleased to announce the availability of
> >     mdadm version 4.0
> > 
> > It is available at the usual places:
> >     http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/raid/mdadm/
> > and via git at
> >     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/mdadm/mdadm.git
> >     http://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/mdadm/
> > 
> > The update in major version number primarily indicates this is a
> > release by it's new maintainer. In addition it contains a large number
> > of fixes in particular for IMSM RAID and clustered RAID support.  In
> > addition this release includes support for IMSM 4k sector drives,
> > failfast and better documentation for journaled RAID.
> 
> Thank you for the new release.  Unfortunately I get 9 failures running the
> test suite:
> 
> tests/00raid1...          FAILED
> tests/07autoassemble...   FAILED
> tests/07changelevels...   FAILED
> tests/07revert-grow...    FAILED
> tests/07revert-inplace... FAILED
> tests/07testreshape5...   FAILED
> tests/10ddf-fail-twice... FAILED
> tests/20raid5journal...   FAILED
> tests/10ddf-incremental-wrong-order...  FAILED

Yep, several tests usually fail. It appears some checks aren't always good.  At
least the 'check' function for reshape/resync isn't reliable in my test, I saw
07changelevelintr fails frequently.

Thanks,
Shaohua

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web