From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 9 01:41:40 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D5216A404; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 01:41:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lulf@pvv.ntnu.no) Received: from merke.itea.ntnu.no (merke.itea.ntnu.no [129.241.7.61]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23F2C13C47E; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 01:41:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lulf@pvv.ntnu.no) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by merke.itea.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B48FB13C697; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 02:23:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from twoflower.idi.ntnu.no (twoflower.idi.ntnu.no [129.241.104.169]) by merke.itea.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 02:23:10 +0100 (CET) Received: by twoflower.idi.ntnu.no (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 3C8BE170F7; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 02:16:35 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 02:16:35 +0100 From: Ulf Lilleengen To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20070309011635.GA4329@twoflower.idi.ntnu.no> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org, le@FreeBSD.org References: <0B1A704D-A455-4741-BC11-A2019BFB4B22@bitheaven.net> <45EF18C3.3070106@freebsd.org> <20070308015812.GA30713@twoflower.idi.ntnu.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070308015812.GA30713@twoflower.idi.ntnu.no> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Content-Scanned: with sophos and spamassassin at mailgw.ntnu.no. Cc: le@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Problems simulating gvinum raid5 rebuild X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 01:41:40 -0000 On tor, mar 08, 2007 at 02:58:12am +0100, Ulf Lilleengen wrote: > On ons, mar 07, 2007 at 08:55:47pm +0100, Lukas Ertl wrote: > > Clayton F wrote: > > > > >Any suggestions? Is using 7 drives exceeding the number that gvinum > > >raid5 will allow? Should I be labeling the drives differently? Is my > > >method for simulating a drive failure/replacement flawed? Any help would > > >be most appreciated! > > > > It's apparently a bug. I'm currently working on some improvements to > > geom_vinum, and this will be addressed, too. > > This mess is because when reading the gvinum configuration on boot-time, none of > the objects is actually bound together and registered within another when the > drive_taste is run (The parser just creates the object. It does not bind > anything together). The states is also not updated. I've already done some work > on this, but I discovered more issues that need to be fixed. I'll try have a > patch ready by tomorrow night. Ok, apparently it does bind objects together, but a subdisk that is not registered with a drive (if the drive is not there) doesn't get tasted. I'm having problems to find a nice way of adding the subdisk without a drive to a plex, so that the plex can get into it's correct state. One way i tried it in gv_plex_taste was to loop through all subdisks, and find subdisks that didn't have any drive, _and_ was to be registered with this plex. Then i registered it with the plex. Something like this: LIST_FOREACH(s, &sc->subdisks, sd) { if s->plex equals plexname if s has no drive add the subdisk to this plex } However, I don't think i have a good enough overview of the locking yet to see why this crashes. -- Ulf Lilleengen