| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
zotalore
n00b
Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 54
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:02 am Post subject: Faulty disk in raid, can badblocks make it usable? |
 |
|
I recently experienced my first software raid (raid5) drive failure. Is there anyway to mark the bad blocks and re-add the drive to the raid?
Here's some more details. When I boot my system md reports the following:
| Code: |
md: Autodetecting RAID arrays.
md: Scanned 4 and added 4 devices.
md: autorun ...
md: considering hdd2 ...
md: adding hdd2 ...
md: adding hdc2 ...
md: adding hdb2 ...
md: adding hda2 ...
md: created md0
md: bind<hda2>
md: bind<hdb2>
md: bind<hdc2>
md: bind<hdd2>
md: running: <hdd2><hdc2><hdb2><hda2>
md: kicking non-fresh hdc2 from array!
md: unbind<hdc2>
md: export_rdev(hdc2)
raid5: device hdd2 operational as raid disk 3
raid5: device hdb2 operational as raid disk 2
raid5: device hda2 operational as raid disk 0
raid5: allocated 4274kB for md0
raid5: raid level 5 set md0 active with 3 out of 4 devices, algorithm 2
RAID5 conf printout:
--- rd:4 wd:3
disk 0, o:1, dev:hda2
disk 2, o:1, dev:hdb2
disk 3, o:1, dev:hdd2
md0: bitmap initialized from disk: read 11/11 pages, set 22589 bits
created bitmap (174 pages) for device md0
md: ... autorun DONE.
|
So it appears that hdc is faulty, even though mdstat does not label the drive with 'F', or do I have to mark it faulty in order to do that?
| Code: |
$ cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md0 : active raid5 hdd2[3] hdb2[2] hda2[0]
2185980288 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [U_UU]
bitmap: 164/174 pages [656KB], 2048KB chunk
unused devices: <none>
|
mdadm reports my array as degraded with one drive removed:
| Code: |
mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Version : 0.90
Creation Time : Sat Feb 23 20:22:25 2008
Raid Level : raid5
Array Size : 2185980288 (2084.71 GiB 2238.44 GB)
Used Dev Size : 728660096 (694.90 GiB 746.15 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 3
Preferred Minor : 0
Persistence : Superblock is persistent
Intent Bitmap : Internal
Update Time : Sun Mar 29 09:51:54 2009
State : active, degraded
Active Devices : 3
Working Devices : 3
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 64K
UUID : bb305d69:b11c41b3:725dd80f:10527e77
Events : 0.1340266
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 3 2 0 active sync /dev/hda2
1 0 0 1 removed
2 3 66 2 active sync /dev/hdb2
3 22 66 3 active sync /dev/hdd2
|
If I run badblocks (I had it running for 24 hours, but it seem to require 2-3 days until it will complete) and got the following messages in my kernel log
| Code: |
hdc: task_in_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error }
hdc: task_in_intr: error=0x84 { DriveStatusError BadCRC }
ide: failed opcode was: unknown
hdc: task_in_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error }
hdc: task_in_intr: error=0x84 { DriveStatusError BadCRC }
ide: failed opcode was: unknown
hdc: task_in_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error }
hdc: task_in_intr: error=0x84 { DriveStatusError BadCRC }
ide: failed opcode was: unknown
hdc: task_in_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error }
hdc: task_in_intr: error=0x84 { DriveStatusError BadCRC }
ide: failed opcode was: unknown
|
The smarctl selftest detects no errors:
| Code: |
# smartctl -l selftest /dev/hdc
smartctl version 5.38 [x86_64-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen
Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/
=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1
Num Test_Description Status Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error
# 1 Extended offline Completed without error 00% 7574 -
|
So is there any hope for this drive, or should I just replace it?
I also have an issue with my current kernel (I guess it's the old IDE driver) since the drives appears as hd and not sd. But I would like to get my full array back before I start building a new kernel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
zotalore
n00b
Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 54
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
I forgot to add the examine output for the faulty drive, which does not indicate any faults:
| Code: |
# mdadm --examine /dev/hdc2
/dev/hdc2:
Magic : a92b4efc
Version : 0.90.00
UUID : bb305d69:b11c41b3:725dd80f:10527e77
Creation Time : Sat Feb 23 20:22:25 2008
Raid Level : raid5
Used Dev Size : 728660096 (694.90 GiB 746.15 GB)
Array Size : 2185980288 (2084.71 GiB 2238.44 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 0
Update Time : Thu Jan 1 03:24:13 2009
State : clean
Internal Bitmap : present
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Checksum : 54b45b6b - correct
Events : 14
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 64K
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
this 1 22 2 1 active sync /dev/hdc2
0 0 3 2 0 active sync /dev/hda2
1 1 22 2 1 active sync /dev/hdc2
2 2 3 66 2 active sync /dev/hdb2
3 3 22 66 3 active sync /dev/hdd2
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dairinin
n00b
Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 64
Location: MSK, RF
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Did you try readding your drive into array?
| Code: | | mdadm md0 --manage --add /dev/hdc2 |
BTW, CRC errors in dmesg are generaly because of a faulty cable or because of 40-wire IDE cable being used for >udma2 transfers.
Bad sectors in modern drives are remapped by drive itself. If you see sectors which you can not read/write, the drive is almost dead as it has already used all available sectors in a reallocation zone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham
Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 10732
Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I concur with Dairinin. The other symptom you reported is seek failures, indicating either that the servo platter is damaged or else there's some sort of electromechanical failure looming. Leaving that drive in the array is like playing with fire: there's a good chance you'll get burned.
- John
_________________
I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zotalore
n00b
Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 54
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I've replaced the drive today. It seems like it will take several days for the reconstruction to complete. I'll inspect the drive on a different machine using tools supplied by the vendor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Kernel & Hardware
