Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-03-26 Thread David Wright
On Tue 26 Mar 2024 at 04:38:52 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: > On 2/9/24 20:36, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: [ … ] > > It's not possible for me to know what went wrong. > > Have you created "reftestfile" inside "/mnt/disktest" directory? > > How many "testfile*" files, if any, were created on the

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-03-26 Thread gene heskett
On 2/9/24 20:36, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: On 10.02.2024 03:34, gene heskett wrote: On 2/8/24 07:22, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: This is how I would test it. First create a new GPT partition table and a new 2TB partition: $ sudo gdisk /dev/sdX check /!\  Make double sure you've

Re: testing new sdm drive continued

2024-02-10 Thread David Christensen
On 2/10/24 08:25, gene heskett wrote: I managed to kill f3write, so f3probe could access it: ene@coyote:/mnt/disktest$ sudo f3probe --destructive --time-ops /dev/sdm F3 probe 8.0 Copyright (C) 2010 Digirati Internet LTDA. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. WARNING:

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-10 Thread gene heskett
On 2/10/24 00:46, David Christensen wrote: On 2/9/24 00:51, gene heskett wrote: On 2/8/24 13:25, David Christensen wrote: On 2/7/24 23:14, gene heskett wrote: gene@coyote:/etc$ sudo smartctl --all -dscsi /dev/sdm ... scsiModePageOffset: response length too short, resp_len=4 offset=4 bd_len=0

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-10 Thread gene heskett
On 2/9/24 20:37, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: On 10.02.2024 03:34, gene heskett wrote: On 2/8/24 07:22, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: This is how I would test it. First create a new GPT partition table and a new 2TB partition: $ sudo gdisk /dev/sdX check /!\  Make double sure you've

Re: testing new sdm drive continued

2024-02-10 Thread gene heskett
On 2/8/24 15:36, Linux-Fan wrote: Alexander V. Makartsev writes: [...] I managed to kill f3write, so f3probe could access it: ene@coyote:/mnt/disktest$ sudo f3probe --destructive --time-ops /dev/sdm F3 probe 8.0 Copyright (C) 2010 Digirati Internet LTDA. This is free software; see the source

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-10 Thread gene heskett
On 2/8/24 15:36, Linux-Fan wrote: Alexander V. Makartsev writes: On 08.02.2024 12:14, gene heskett wrote: gene@coyote:/etc$ sudo smartctl --all -dscsi /dev/sdm smartctl 7.3 2022-02-28 r5338 [x86_64-linux-6.1.0-17-rt-amd64] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-22, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke,

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread David Christensen
On 2/9/24 00:51, gene heskett wrote: On 2/8/24 13:25, David Christensen wrote: On 2/7/24 23:14, gene heskett wrote: gene@coyote:/etc$ sudo smartctl --all -dscsi /dev/sdm ... scsiModePageOffset: response length too short, resp_len=4 offset=4 bd_len=0 scsiModePageOffset: response length too

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread Alexander V. Makartsev
On 10.02.2024 03:34, gene heskett wrote: On 2/8/24 07:22, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: This is how I would test it. First create a new GPT partition table and a new 2TB partition: $ sudo gdisk /dev/sdX check /!\  Make double sure you've selected the right device by using "lsblk" and

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread gene heskett
On 2/8/24 07:22, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: On 08.02.2024 12:14, gene heskett wrote: gene@coyote:/etc$ sudo smartctl --all -dscsi /dev/sdm smartctl 7.3 2022-02-28 r5338 [x86_64-linux-6.1.0-17-rt-amd64] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-22, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke,

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread tomas
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 09:21:24AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > >> So, if you want to use `badblocks`, you may want to do it on an > >> encrypted partition (that covers the whole device) rather than on the > >> raw device. > > This is an interesting idea. I haven't wrapped my head around "what

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread Max Nikulin
On 09/02/2024 20:23, Dan Ritter wrote: I would (I have, in the past) generate a non-random but mostly incompressible large file There are 2 kinds of random number generators: - Cryptographic grade are intentionally hard to predict - Pseudo-random A pseudo-random generator of reasonable

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread Stefan Monnier
>> So, if you want to use `badblocks`, you may want to do it on an >> encrypted partition (that covers the whole device) rather than on the >> raw device. > This is an interesting idea. I haven't wrapped my head around "what if > the controller maps several block addresses to the same physical

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread tomas
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 08:23:30AM -0500, Dan Ritter wrote: > to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 07:50:18AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > So, if you want to use `badblocks`, you may want to do it on an > > > encrypted partition (that covers the whole device) rather than on

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread Dan Ritter
to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 07:50:18AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > So, if you want to use `badblocks`, you may want to do it on an > > encrypted partition (that covers the whole device) rather than on the > > raw device. > > This is an interesting idea. I haven't

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread tomas
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 07:50:18AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > BTW2, there is a program for that, "badblocks", part of e2fsprograms, so > > chances are it's installed. I'd look into that man page. > > `badblocks` sadly writes the same pattern on every block, AFAIK, so if > the drive just

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread Stefan Monnier
> BTW2, there is a program for that, "badblocks", part of e2fsprograms, so > chances are it's installed. I'd look into that man page. `badblocks` sadly writes the same pattern on every block, AFAIK, so if the drive just remaps new logical blocks to already used physical blocks, `badblocks` may be

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread gene heskett
On 2/8/24 15:11, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: On 09.02.2024 00:23, gene heskett wrote: Looks neat. Any chance this will crash my machine? I have other design work going on, and I'd hate to have to start from scratch. Well, it will consume CPU cycles for sure, at least to calculate md5 hashes

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-09 Thread gene heskett
On 2/8/24 13:25, David Christensen wrote: On 2/7/24 23:14, gene heskett wrote: gene@coyote:/etc$ sudo smartctl --all -dscsi /dev/sdm smartctl 7.3 2022-02-28 r5338 [x86_64-linux-6.1.0-17-rt-amd64] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-22, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org ===

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-08 Thread David Christensen
On 2/8/24 12:36, Linux-Fan wrote: Alexander V. Makartsev writes: From here on I'd suggest trying the tools from package `f3`. Thank you for the suggestion -- I was hoping somebody knew of a FOSS Debian package that can validate drive capacity: https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/f3

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-08 Thread David Christensen
On 2/8/24 11:23, gene heskett wrote: On 2/8/24 07:22, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: This is how I would test it. ... Looks neat. Any chance this will crash my machine? I have other design work going on, and I'd hate to have to start from scratch. Do not use a production computer for drive

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-08 Thread tomas
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 01:11:05AM +0500, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: > On 09.02.2024 00:23, gene heskett wrote: > > Looks neat. Any chance this will crash my machine? I have other design > > work going on, and I'd hate to have to start from scratch. > Well, it will consume CPU cycles for sure,

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-08 Thread Linux-Fan
Alexander V. Makartsev writes: On 08.02.2024 12:14, gene heskett wrote: gene@coyote:/etc$ sudo smartctl --all -dscsi /dev/sdm smartctl 7.3 2022-02-28 r5338 [x86_64-linux-6.1.0-17-rt-amd64] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-22, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke,

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-08 Thread Alexander V. Makartsev
On 09.02.2024 00:23, gene heskett wrote: Looks neat. Any chance this will crash my machine? I have other design work going on, and I'd hate to have to start from scratch. Well, it will consume CPU cycles for sure, at least to calculate md5 hashes and perform I/O on the target drive and RAM. I

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-08 Thread gene heskett
On 2/8/24 07:22, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: On 08.02.2024 12:14, gene heskett wrote: gene@coyote:/etc$ sudo smartctl --all -dscsi /dev/sdm smartctl 7.3 2022-02-28 r5338 [x86_64-linux-6.1.0-17-rt-amd64] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-22, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke,

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-08 Thread Dan Ritter
David Christensen wrote: > > Page 1-16 states: > > USB 3.1 Gen 1 connectors (20-1 pin U31G1_12; U31G1_34) > > This connector allows you to connect a USB 3.1 Gen 1 module for additional > USB 3.1 Gen 1 front or rear panel ports. With an installed USB 3.1 Gen 1 > module, you can enjoy all the

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-08 Thread David Christensen
On 2/8/24 10:24, David Christensen wrote: On 2/7/24 23:14, gene heskett wrote: gene@coyote:/etc$ sudo smartctl --all -dscsi /dev/sdm ... scsiModePageOffset: response length too short, resp_len=4 offset=4 bd_len=0 scsiModePageOffset: response length too short, resp_len=4 offset=4 bd_len=0  >>

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-08 Thread David Christensen
On 2/7/24 23:14, gene heskett wrote: gene@coyote:/etc$ sudo smartctl --all -dscsi /dev/sdm smartctl 7.3 2022-02-28 r5338 [x86_64-linux-6.1.0-17-rt-amd64] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-22, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === Vendor:

Re: testing new sdm drive

2024-02-08 Thread Alexander V. Makartsev
On 08.02.2024 12:14, gene heskett wrote: gene@coyote:/etc$ sudo smartctl --all -dscsi /dev/sdm smartctl 7.3 2022-02-28 r5338 [x86_64-linux-6.1.0-17-rt-amd64] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-22, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === Vendor: