Bug 750480 - Anaconda complains about wrong RAID metadata version for /boot
Summary: Anaconda complains about wrong RAID metadata version for /boot
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: anaconda
Version: 16
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Lehman
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-11-01 09:46 UTC by Andreas Wolf
Modified: 2012-10-04 23:10 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-10-04 23:10:14 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
/tmp/anaconda.log (23.98 KB, text/plain)
2011-11-05 13:45 UTC, Andreas Wolf
no flags Details
/tmp/program.log (199.99 KB, text/plain)
2011-11-05 13:45 UTC, Andreas Wolf
no flags Details
/tmp/storage.log (668.40 KB, text/plain)
2011-11-05 13:46 UTC, Andreas Wolf
no flags Details
/tmp/syslog (134.73 KB, text/plain)
2011-11-05 13:46 UTC, Andreas Wolf
no flags Details
mdadm output (740 bytes, text/plain)
2011-11-05 13:49 UTC, Andreas Wolf
no flags Details
storage.log with updates-750480.1.img (1.32 MB, text/plain)
2011-11-07 16:47 UTC, Ian Pilcher
no flags Details
storage.log with updates-750480.2.img (1.32 MB, text/plain)
2011-11-07 18:39 UTC, Ian Pilcher
no flags Details
anaconda.log with updates-750480.2.img (24.48 KB, text/plain)
2011-11-07 18:40 UTC, Ian Pilcher
no flags Details

Description Andreas Wolf 2011-11-01 09:46:44 UTC
Description of problem:

In the partitioning screen, Anaconda complains about a wrong RAID metadata version number for /boot (0, 0.90 and 1.0 would work).

I deleted and re-created the array after that (with mdadm --create --metadata 0.90). Still did not work; a reboot did not change anything.


How reproducible:

Only tried on my local desktop PC, don't know if this is reproducible on other hardware.


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Try installing Fedora 16 with /boot on a RAID device.


Actual results:

The metadata version is not detected as compatible.


Expected results:

The metadata version should be detected as compatible.

Comment 1 David Lehman 2011-11-01 13:54:10 UTC
Please attach the following logs from /tmp in the installer shell on tty2:

 /tmp/anaconda.log
 /tmp/storage.log
 /tmp/program.log
 /tmp/syslog

Thanks.

Comment 2 Andreas Wolf 2011-11-05 13:45:16 UTC
Created attachment 531893 [details]
/tmp/anaconda.log

Comment 3 Andreas Wolf 2011-11-05 13:45:59 UTC
Created attachment 531894 [details]
/tmp/program.log

Comment 4 Andreas Wolf 2011-11-05 13:46:24 UTC
Created attachment 531895 [details]
/tmp/storage.log

Comment 5 Andreas Wolf 2011-11-05 13:46:47 UTC
Created attachment 531896 [details]
/tmp/syslog

Comment 6 Andreas Wolf 2011-11-05 13:49:11 UTC
Created attachment 531897 [details]
mdadm output

Output of "mdadm --detail" for the array in question. This clearly shows that it *is* an v0.90 array.

Comment 7 Andreas Wolf 2011-11-05 13:50:25 UTC
Uploaded the files asked for.

The error message (translated back from German) is: "RAID arrays that contain '/boot filesystem' must have one of the following metadata versions: 0,0.90,1.0"

Comment 8 Andreas Wolf 2011-11-05 14:13:03 UTC
Just an additional note: The very same RAID array works with Anaconda from the Fedora 15 netinstall ISO.

Comment 9 Ian Pilcher 2011-11-06 18:03:23 UTC
I am seeing the same thing.  Here is the output of mdadm -D on my /boot
device (in Fedora 15):

/dev/md0:
        Version : 0.90
  Creation Time : Mon Mar 28 22:50:35 2011
     Raid Level : raid1
     Array Size : 530048 (517.71 MiB 542.77 MB)
  Used Dev Size : 530048 (517.71 MiB 542.77 MB)
   Raid Devices : 2
  Total Devices : 2
Preferred Minor : 0
    Persistence : Superblock is persistent

    Update Time : Sun Nov  6 11:51:47 2011
          State : clean
 Active Devices : 2
Working Devices : 2
 Failed Devices : 0
  Spare Devices : 0

           UUID : c8e0b967:e87610a3:5f2ebae2:146363c3 (local to host ian.icp.selfip.net)
         Events : 0.115

    Number   Major   Minor   RaidDevice State
       0       8        3        0      active sync   /dev/sda3
       1       8       19        1      active sync   /dev/sdb3

Comment 10 Ian Pilcher 2011-11-06 18:12:28 UTC
I just verified that mdadm -D also shows the metadata version as 0.90 when
run from a shell in the anaconda environment.

Comment 11 David Lehman 2011-11-07 14:30:49 UTC
Apparently our method for obtaining the metadata version of existing v0 arrays does not work. I have uploaded an F16 updates image (against anaconda-16.25) with a proposed fix, which you can test by adding the following to your boot command line:

  updates=http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates-750480.1.img

Please share your results.

Comment 12 Ian Pilcher 2011-11-07 14:53:56 UTC
(In reply to comment #11)
> 
>   updates=http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates-750480.1.img
> 
> Please share your results.

No joy.  I am still getting the error message.

Comment 13 David Lehman 2011-11-07 15:22:45 UTC
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > 
> >   updates=http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates-750480.1.img
> > 
> > Please share your results.
> 
> No joy.  I am still getting the error message.

Please attach storage.log so I can see what might have gone wrong.

Comment 14 Ian Pilcher 2011-11-07 16:47:35 UTC
Created attachment 532094 [details]
storage.log with updates-750480.1.img

Comment 15 David Lehman 2011-11-07 18:21:57 UTC
I see what I did wrong there. New updates (.2) replaces old image:

  updates=http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates-750480.2.img

Comment 16 Ian Pilcher 2011-11-07 18:39:28 UTC
Created attachment 532115 [details]
storage.log with updates-750480.2.img

Still getting the same error.  New storage log attached.

Comment 17 Ian Pilcher 2011-11-07 18:40:47 UTC
Created attachment 532117 [details]
anaconda.log with updates-750480.2.img

anaconda.log just to prove that I really did use the updated img file.
(I had to check myself.)

Comment 18 David Lehman 2011-11-08 17:36:09 UTC
Ok, the root cause for this is that mdadm --examine --brief outputs the metadata version, but only for v1 arrays. This means there is no reliable way to obtain the metadata version for an array that is not already active. Once the array is active you can look in the udev info for MD_METADATA but the way anaconda works this method requires us to make a special backtrack to update md arrays' metadata version. I filed a bug about the inconsistency in mdadm: bug 752156

Comment 19 David Lehman 2011-11-08 19:30:20 UTC
New updates available:

 updates=http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates-750480.3.img

I tested this one.

Comment 20 Ian Pilcher 2011-11-08 21:25:17 UTC
(In reply to comment #19)
> New updates available:
> 
>  updates=http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates-750480.3.img
> 
> I tested this one.

I am currently travelling.  I will test this one when I get home on
Thursday.

Comment 21 Ian Pilcher 2011-11-10 18:38:54 UTC
(In reply to comment #19)
>  updates=http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates-750480.3.img

Works for me.

Comment 22 Matthieu Araman 2011-11-12 22:00:30 UTC
same pb here.
error message disappear and installation continue with 
(In reply to comment #19)
>  updates=http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates-750480.3.img

Comment 23 Ian Pilcher 2011-12-22 17:02:33 UTC
I am getting a 404 trying to retrieve http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates-750480.3.img.

Comment 24 Ian Pilcher 2011-12-22 17:04:22 UTC
(In reply to comment #23)
> I am getting a 404 trying to retrieve
> http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates-750480.3.img.

Looks like it's now at http://dlehman.fedorapeople.org/updates/updates-750480.3.img

Comment 25 Phil Anderson 2011-12-24 02:04:53 UTC
Thanks.  Fixed for me as well.

Comment 26 David Lehman 2012-10-04 23:10:14 UTC
This was fixed for Fedora 17.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.