Raid0 drives not correctly detected on debian 12.2
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.
Raid0 drives not correctly detected on debian 12.2
Hello everybody,
I've recently updated a very old machine to Debian 12. This machine has a dual-boot setup with Windows 10.
The Windows system is installed on an RAID0 configuration (Intel softraid) on two physical drives, and it worked correctly before the update.
Now, when I run os-prober in order to detect the windows partition, I get the following:
Code:
lsblk: /dev/mapper/isw_bjdgfgejcf_RAIDSTACKER*[0-9]: not a block device
So I run fdisk -l to check the situation (I hid the unrelated drives from the output):
Code:
rekotc@QSTACKER:/dev/mapper$ sudo fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sdd: 465,76 GiB, 500107862016 bytes, 976773168 sectors
Disk model: WDC WD5000AACS-0
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0x141abb57
Disk /dev/sde: 465,76 GiB, 500107862016 bytes, 976773168 sectors
Disk model: WDC WD5000AACS-0
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xacbc2e15
Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/sde1 * 2048 206847 204800 100M 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
/dev/sde2 206848 1952495352 1952288505 930,9G 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
/dev/sde3 1952495616 1953529855 1034240 505M 27 Hidden NTFS WinRE
[...]
Disk /dev/mapper/isw_bjdgfgejcf_RAIDSTACKER: 931,52 GiB, 1000210694144 bytes, 1953536512 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 131072 bytes / 262144 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xacbc2e15
Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/mapper/isw_bjdgfgejcf_RAIDSTACKER-part1 * 2048 206847 204800 100M 7 HPFS
/dev/mapper/isw_bjdgfgejcf_RAIDSTACKER-part2 206848 1952495352 1952288505 930,9G 7 HPFS
/dev/mapper/isw_bjdgfgejcf_RAIDSTACKER-part3 1952495616 1953529855 1034240 505M 27 Hidden NTFS Win
Unfortunately, I cannot remember the old output for this setup, but it seems something wrong is going on here. The two drives are detected first as single drives, as /sdd and /sde, plus the /sde2 partition seems to be some kind of "raid" drive since it shows a 930,9G size. And then I have /dev/mapper/isw_bjdgfgejcf_RAIDSTACKER, which should be the actual raid0 configuration, but for some reason the disk is splitted into 3 different devices, with this "part1", "part2", "part3" added at the end of the device name.
My guess is somehow a raid-0 is made with the whole 500G drive sdd and the 2nd partition of sde. That raid is partitioned into part[123]. However, the partition table of sde makes no sense. Maybe your controller is hiding the real disk partitions in order to provide the raid.
Can you try reading blocks from each partition of the raid using dd to see if it works?
I was finally able to spend some time on this machine, and I solved the problem! I write here the solution, it might be useful to somebody else.
I checked the logs, searching for errors or weird messages:
Code:
journalctl --since "2 hour ago"
and i got this:
Code:
udisksd[798]: failed to load module mdraid: libbd_mdraid.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
udisksd[798]: Failed to load the 'mdraid' libblockdev plugin
It seemed like the mdraid module was missing!
So I installed the following packages:
I only did one job ever on Raid 0, and it was three spinning rust drives with no backup, and no redundancy. Data was striped across 2 drives, and the 3rd held the key to what was written where.
The server had died. If it had been a drive, for sure that company would have gone bankrupt. They very nearly did (go bankrupt) over the breakdown as it was.
Nowadays, NVMEs do more than those speeds, and SSDs. There's no need to have spinning rust on Raid 0. There is a need for backup, unless you're very careless of your data.
If you're seeing the need to run SSDs or NVMEs on Raid0, you must have something exotic under your care - the LHC?
I doubt the OP had any say in the initial configuration - this is Win10 we are discussing here. I also consider RAID0 as a train-wreck looking for a place to happen, but each to their own.
The update will be appreciated by anyone in the same situation in future.
eheh, we are talking about a 17+ years old machine, it was my gaming rig back then, I was young and reckless and I thought it would be cool to setup a raid0 and get the maximum speed
So I've been regretting it for 17 years , especially because it's an RST raid, at the time not well supported on linux. Nowadays I turn on this machine a couple of times per year and I'm always surprised to see that the drives are still spinning!
Well, if your carefully worked-up saved games go down, I'm sure you'll survive.
The place I did that job at was getting printing jobs received over the internet and making it's own printing plates by some laser-controlled process which then got printed onsite. It was a massive printing operation out in the sticks in Kerry, about as far South West as you can get in Ireland.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
, especially because it's an RST raid, at the time not well supported on linux. Nowadays I turn on this machine a couple of times per year and I'm always surprised to see that the drives are still spinning!
