7.1 Panic on degraded disk w/mpt

[Charles Sprickman]

More info...

On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Scott Long wrote:

> Charles Sprickman wrote:
>> (posted on -stable already, no takers - added info: full dmesg, crash info 
>> from panic when array finished rebuilding, some comments on dmesg)
>> 
>> Howdy,
>> 
>> I dug around and can't find a PR on this, and the only other report I saw 
>> was in this mailing list post that has no replies:
>> 
>> http://www.nabble.com/7.1-BETA2-panic-on-mpt-degrade-td20183173.html
>> 
>> The hardware is a Dell PowerEdge 860 with the Dell/LSI SAS5 controller:
>> 
>> mpt0: <LSILogic SAS/SATA Adapter> port 0xec00-0xecff mem 
>> 0xfe9fc000-0xfe9fffff,0xfe9e0000-0xfe9effff irq 16 at device 8.0 on pci2
>> mpt0: MPI Version=1.5.13.0
>> 
>> The panic is repeatable by forcing the array into a degraded state.  When 
>> the array finishes rebuilding, the box also panics.
>> 
>> Here's my best shot at getting info out of kgdb (panic on array going to 
>> degraded state):
>
> I wonder if the MPT card is temporarily detaching and then reattaching
> the logical drive when the rebuild completes.  The info you posted is
> inconclusive here.

I was able to get it to panic again, and grabbed a picture of the console 
that includes the output just before the panic.

It does appear the device goes away:

mpt0: mpt_cam_event: 0x16
mpt0: mpt_cam_event: 0x12
mpt0: mpt_cam_event: 0x16
(mpt0:vol0:1): Physical Disk Status Changed
mpt0: mpt_cam_event: 0x15
mpt0: mpt_cam_event: 0x21
(mpt0:vol0:1): Physical Disk Status Changed
mpt0:vol0(mpt0:0:0): Volume Status Changed
mpt0: mpt_cam_event: 0x15
mpt0: mpt_cam_event: 0x21
mpt0: mpt_cam_event: 0x15
mpt0: mpt_cam_event: 0x21
mpt0:vol0(mpt0:0:0): RAID-1 - Degraded
mpt0:vol0(mpt0:0:0): Status ( Enabled )
(mpt0:vol0:1): No longer configured

Fatal Trap 12.... blah blah blah

Is that information of any use?  Does "No longer configured" = device 
detached?

Thanks,

Charles

> CAM (the FreeBSD SCSI layer) has had some problems handling device 
> detaches, but we've been very fortunate to have someone examining and 
> fixing this recently.  Would it be possible for you to upgrade to the 
> most recent 8-CURRENT tree, and re-run your test?  If not, I'll see 
> about generating a patchset against 7.1.
>
> Scott
>