[18.04.1] Backport support for Intel VROC arrays in mdadm
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
mdadm (Ubuntu) |
Fix Released
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
Bionic |
Fix Released
|
High
|
Dimitri John Ledkov | ||
Cosmic |
Fix Released
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
[Impact]
* mdadm as shipped in 18.04.0 does not support Intel VROC arrays, as to be shipped over Bionic LTS lifecycle in multiple laptop/
* this is a request to backport mdadm master, with support of Intel VROC arrays, and subsequent compiler fixes, and reshaping fixes, to fully support VROC arrays (including reshaping).
[Test Cases]
* Ensure existing Intel IMSM raids continue to assemble, boot, shutdown cleanly, bootable when degraded.
* Ensure existing linux raids continue to assemble, boot, shutdown cleanly, bootable when degraded.
- with 0.90 metadata; 1.0 metadata; 1.1 metadata; 1.2 metadata
* [Optional] ensure that DDF raids continue to assemble, boot, shutdown cleanly, bootable when degraded.
* Validate installers onto Intel IMSM raids
* Validate installers onto Linux RAID
* Validate bare-metal public clouds that use mdadm
[Regression Potential]
* Worst case scenario is failing to start assembled array in rw mode, on boot. This would result in dropping into emergency shell/mode in either initramfs, or emergency.target requiring manual intervention by a sysadmin to recover and start synced raid array. However, the test cases above should cover this regression potential adequately.
* Other changes, to resizing/reshaping may result in failure to resize/reshape, but these are rare maintenance operations for which one should have a backup - or able to recover from such an operation.
[Other Info]
* xnox offline 7th July - 16th July
Changed in mdadm (Ubuntu Cosmic): | |
status: | New → Fix Released |
Changed in mdadm (Ubuntu Bionic): | |
status: | New → In Progress |
importance: | Undecided → High |
milestone: | none → ubuntu-18.04.1 |
assignee: | nobody → Dimitri John Ledkov 🌈 (xnox) |
description: | updated |
reviewing the diff, my biggest concern is that there appear to be new udev rules upstream. Are we going to be shipping these new upstream udev rules in the mdadm package? Have you examined the impact on other block layers, in particular lvm where I believe we are shipping non-upstream rules?