Bug#844640: mdadm: Newly-created array doesn't assemble at boot - related to hostname change?
Andy Smith
andy at strugglers.net
Fri Nov 18 04:06:25 UTC 2016
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 06:23:08PM +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
> After install, the server's hostname was changed to "jfd".
>
> An additional array (md5) was created using member devices /dev/sd{c,d}.
> It was added to /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf and update-initramfs -u was
> called.
>
> This array does not assemble during boot.
I've found a work-around.
I noticed that mpt3sas driver wasn't being loaded in the initramfs,
probably because none of the drives on it are required to boot the
system.
I added mpt3sas to /etc/initramfs-tools/modules and then all drives
are seen during initramfs, and arrays are assembled:
Begin: Loading essential drivers ... done.
Begin: Running /scripts/init-premount ... done.
Begin: Mounting root file system ... Begin: Running /scripts/local-top ... Begin: Assembling all MD arrays ... [ 40.1
58317] random: nonblocking pool is initialized
[ 40.161795] md: bind<sdf1>
[ 40.162161] md: bind<sde1>
[ 40.163226] md: raid1 personality registered for level 1
[ 40.163654] md/raid1:md0: active with 2 out of 2 mirrors
[ 40.163745] md0: detected capacity change from 0 to 510328832
[ 40.164259] md0: unknown partition table
mdadm: /dev/md/0 has been started with 2 drives.
[ 40.176662] md: bind<sdf2>
[ 40.177235] md: bind<sde2>
[ 40.178332] md: raid10 personality registered for level 10
[ 40.178656] md/raid10:md1: active with 2 out of 2 devices
[ 40.178746] md1: detected capacity change from 0 to 1998585856
[ 40.179170] md1: unknown partition table
mdadm: /dev/md/1 has been started with 2 drives.
[ 40.189887] md: md2 stopped.
[ 40.191292] md: bind<sdf3>
[ 40.191498] md: bind<sde3>
[ 40.192705] md/raid10:md2: active with 2 out of 2 devices
[ 40.192797] md2: detected capacity change from 0 to 999292928
[ 40.193128] md2: unknown partition table
mdadm: /dev/md/2 has been started with 2 drives.
[ 40.204234] md: md3 stopped.
[ 40.205278] md: bind<sdf5>
[ 40.205695] md: bind<sde5>
[ 40.206613] md/raid10:md3: active with 2 out of 2 devices
[ 40.206704] md3: detected capacity change from 0 to 12492734464
[ 40.207094] md3: unknown partition table
mdadm: /dev/md/3 has been started with 2 drives.
[ 40.218963] md: md5 stopped.
[ 40.223807] sdb: unknown partition table
[ 40.228841] sda: unknown partition table
[ 40.229044] md: bind<sda>
[ 40.229613] md: bind<sdb>
[ 40.234024] sdb: unknown partition table
[ 40.243686] md/raid10:md5: active with 2 out of 2 devices
[ 40.243867] created bitmap (14 pages) for device md5
[ 40.244684] md5: bitmap initialized from disk: read 1 pages, set 0 of 28614 bits
[ 40.245376] md5: detected capacity change from 0 to 1920248840192
[ 40.248331] md5: unknown partition table
mdadm: /dev/md/5 has been started with 2 drives.
Success: assembled all arrays.
done.
[ 40.260413] device-mapper: uevent: version 1.0.3
[ 40.260540] device-mapper: ioctl: 4.27.0-ioctl (2013-10-30) initialised: dm-devel at redhat.com
done.
Begin: Running /scripts/local-premount ... [ 40.265067] PM: Starting manual resume from disk
done.
Begin: Will now check root file system ... fsck from util-linux 2.25.2
[/sbin/fsck.ext4 (1) -- /dev/md1] fsck.ext4 -a -C0 /dev/md1
root: clean, 44775/122160 files, 265568/487936 blocks
done.
[ 40.296866] EXT4-fs (md1): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null)
done.
Begin: Running /scripts/local-bottom ... done.
Begin: Running /scripts/init-bottom ... done.
[ 40.350701] systemd[1]: systemd 215 running in system mode. (+PAM +AUDIT +SELINUX +IMA +SYSVINIT +LIBCRYPTSETUP +GCR
YPT +ACL +XZ -SECCOMP -APPARMOR)
[ 40.350843] systemd[1]: Detected virtualization 'xen'.
[ 40.350920] systemd[1]: Detected architecture 'x86-64'.
Welcome to Debian GNU/Linux 8 (jessie)!
I still think there must be an issue here as I can see no reason why
udev should not have incrementally-assembled this array on later
appearance of the drives.
Anyway, it seems there is some discussion of this on linux-raid now:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-raid&m=147935582503112&w=2
so I will continue working through it there.
Cheers,
Andy
More information about the pkg-mdadm-devel
mailing list