Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 31 Aug 2000 12:01:50 +0400 (MSD) | From | "Alexander V. Nikolaev" <> | Subject | Re: Strange messages in my kernel log |
| |
On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Neil Brown wrote:
>On Wednesday August 30, avn@spylog.com wrote: >> >> I have strange messages in my kernel log (1-2 messages per day) >> >> raid5: bug: stripe->bh_new[2], sector 477640 exists >> raid5: bh 8ffd6da0, bh_new 8ffd63e0 >> raid5: bug: stripe->bh_new[2], sector 6677320 exists >> raid5: bh aca1f060, bh_new aca1f720 >> raid5: bug: stripe->bh_new[1], sector 6854048 exists >> raid5: bh b94c02c0, bh_new b94c0260 >> raid5: bug: stripe->bh_new[2], sector 6889584 exists >> raid5: bh 833949c0, bh_new 83394d80 >> >> >> What does it mean? Can this cause data corruption? Can i fix this problem? >> I use softvare RAID level 5, in kernel 2.2.16 with RH patches. > >What does it means? > > It means that raid5 received an IO request for a block of data for > which is already had an outstanding IO request. In these cases the > two i/o requests had different buffer_head strutures. > raid5 reports a bug, but actually handles the situation fairly > gracefully: it blocks the second request until the first has > finished. > >Can this cause data corruption? > > Not directly, but it might be a symptom of something else that could > cause corruption. > >Can i fix this problem? > > Maybe, but first we need to understand it. > The question is, how could there be two different buffer_heads for > the same block on disk? > My understanding of the 2.2 buffer cache is not very good, but I > think that all filesystems and block device IO go through the buffer > cache, so any of these accesses should never allow two buffer_heads > to point to the same block. > However I believe that swapping doesn't go through the buffer cache. > > So: what are you doing with the raid5 partition. > What sort of file system? Ext2fs with strige=16
> Are you swapping to a file on the filesystems? No I have BIG MySQL database on this FS
> Is there any chance that a parity reconstruction is happening when > you get these messages. Hmm... Parity reconstuction was complete before i put any data to new array. I not seen messages about another reconstruction.
> Is there anything at all about your usage of the raid5 device that > could possibly be at all out of the ordinary? >
>> Also I have second question. >> How much stable software RAID in latset 2.4.0 test series? > >quite stable, but not very fast. RAID5 in 2.4.0 in particular is much >slower than 2.2.xx with mingo's patches. I'm working on this from >time to time. Can I upgrade kernel without rebuild/reformat array?
-- With best regards Alexander V. Nikolaev System administrator of spylog.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |