Linux - HardwareThis forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Hi,
I have two 1.5TB disks (/dev/sda & /dev/sdb) in a RAID 1 configuration set up on a Kubuntu 12.04 system. The RAID device is broken into 9 partitions, md5 through md13 and AFAIK I set them all up in the same way. When I run gparted, sda & sdb are in the list of disks, but so is /dev/md5. And in the xterm that I ran gparted from I get:
/dev/md5: unrecognised disk label
The disk maps displayed by gparted look correct.
Ok. So then I run 'parted -l' to get more info and I get this:
Model: ATA ST31500341AS (scsi)
Disk /dev/sda: 1500GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos
Error: /dev/md5: unrecognised disk label
Error: /dev/md8: unrecognised disk label
Error: /dev/md9: unrecognised disk label
Error: /dev/md7: unrecognised disk label
Error: /dev/md11: unrecognised disk label
Error: /dev/md10: unrecognised disk label
Model: Linux Software RAID Array (md)
Disk /dev/md13: 161GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: loop
Number Start End Size File system Flags
1 0.00B 161GB 161GB ext3
Error: /dev/md14: unrecognised disk label
Error: /dev/md12: unrecognised disk label
Error: /dev/md6: unrecognised disk label
All that does is confuse me even more. Can someone please offer an explanation as to why the output from these two commands seem to be showing two different and (I think) incorrect things? What should the output look like?
That's part of what is confusing me. Gparted only show five devices, sda - d and md5. Why not the other md devices? Parted says that all of the md devices have bad disk labels - except md13. Why md13? Maybe all of the md devices are supposed to have disk labels or maybe none of them are or maybe it doesn't matter. I just don't know. So I'm not sure whether I should somehow change them so that they all look the same or what. Everything seems to be running OK without any errors, so what do you think that I should do?
- When I run 'gparted' it lists five devices (sda,sdb,sdc,sdd,md5) Why five? I have nine md devices. I understand the 'gparted' is a partitioning tool, but it should at least give me a correct list of the devices that I can partition. Seems to me that either all of the md partitions should be listed or none of them should.
- When 'gparted' starts up, it displays the error "/dev/md5: unrecognised disk label". Is there something wrong with the way that "/dev/md5" is set up? Should I be concerned that it seems to have found a problem with one aspect of one of my RAID devices?
- When I run 'parted -l' it "lists partition layout on all block devices". It does so for the four sd devices - that's good'. It then says 'unrecognised disk label" on 8 of the 9 md devices. The ninth one is displayed like this:
Model: Linux Software RAID Array (md)
Disk /dev/md13: 161GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: loop
Number Start End Size File system Flags
1 0.00B 161GB 161GB ext3
Why? Is there something wrong with the way the other 8 md devices are set up? Is it something that I need to fix?
It's the inconsistency that bothers me. I worry that either I did something wrong when I set everything up or that something has gone wrong in the recent past. It might not be something critical, but it still bothers me.
Rather than getting stuck on particular linux utility behaviors that are not useful, if '/proc/mdstat' md device components agree with information in '/proc/partitions', acknowledge and move on. There will future opportunities to solve worthy puzzles.
For linux software raid, '/proc/mdstat' and the 'mdadm' tool are your only true allys.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.