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

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <587704FC.6030701@suse.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Jan 2017 12:24:28 +0800
From:   Guoqing Jiang <gqjiang@...e.com>
To:     Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@...il.com>,
        Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>,
        Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs@...il.com>
Cc:     "linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Brown, Neil" <neilb@...e.com>
Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: mdadm 4.0 - A tool for managing md Soft RAID under
 Linux



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