Salyzyn, Mark wrote:
From: Douglas Gilbert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All may not be lost. If a medium error occurs and the ASC and
ASCQ imply the sector could be read but
failed ECC then the READ LONG SCSI command should fetch the
block (plus ECC and other data). For example a Fujitsu MAM31
>BTW I noticed that the block layer reads "around" a medium
>error. Say 8 KB is being read and a medium error occurs
>(and the info field is set to the lba of the first failure)
>then several small reads are done to reconstruct as much
>of the original 8 KB as possible (probably with a block of
>ze
"Salyzyn, Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> If the data is of the form to permit some loss, for example video, audio
> content or an error correcting stream of data, someone can make a case
> where READ_LONG is an appropriate action to take to help fill in missing
> content.
>
> A fun thought
From: Douglas Gilbert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> All may not be lost. If a medium error occurs and the ASC and
> ASCQ imply the sector could be read but
> failed ECC then the READ LONG SCSI command should fetch the
> block (plus ECC and other data). For example a Fujitsu MAM3184
> returns
nt: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 1:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Kit Gerrits; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Disk Errors
So there are two situations in which damaged blocks remain
accessible:
1) unrecoverable medium errors
...
What's the rationale behind leaving a damaged block
t the data is gone ;->
Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bryan Henderson
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 1:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Kit Gerrits; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Disk Errors
>So th
>So there are two situations in which damaged blocks remain
>accessible:
>1) unrecoverable medium errors
> ...
What's the rationale behind leaving a damaged block accessible in the case
of an unrecoverable medium error? A possibility that someone might
actually be able to recover the data?
.
Andy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Douglas Gilbert
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 7:44 AM
To: Kit Gerrits
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Disk Errors
Kit Gerrits wrote:
> I have found 08:05 to correspond to /dev/s
Salyzyn
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Douglas Gilbert
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 7:44 AM
To: Kit Gerrits
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Disk Errors
Kit Gerrits wrote:
> I have found 08:05 to correspond to /dev/s
?:??:? - Missing - Mount points it
to:
# /dev/sda5 5.3G 1.5G 3.6G 30% /usr
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Salyzyn, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Verzonden: dinsdag 1 februari 2005 4:15
Aan: Kit Gerrits
Onderwerp: RE: Disk errors
The controller does not appear to be
- Mount points it
to:
# /dev/sda5 5.3G 1.5G 3.6G 30% /usr
> -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
> Van: Salyzyn, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Verzonden: dinsdag 1 februari 2005 4:15
> Aan: Kit Gerrits
> Onderwerp: RE: Disk errors
>
> The controller does no
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: Disk errors
But if the PERC (controller) handles disk errors, what could cause:
I/O Error Dev 08:05 Sector 529712
I would assume that this error is generated by the harddrive, but shouldn't
the controller catch SCSI errors (and relocate sectors automagical
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 12:41:13AM +0100, Kit Gerrits wrote:
> But if the PERC (controller) handles disk errors, what could cause:
>
> I/O Error Dev 08:05 Sector 529712
>
> I would assume that this error is generated by the harddrive, but shouldn't
> the controller
But if the PERC (controller) handles disk errors, what could cause:
I/O Error Dev 08:05 Sector 529712
I would assume that this error is generated by the harddrive, but shouldn't
the controller catch SCSI errors (and relocate sectors automagically)?
Kit
SCSI relevant DMESG:
scsi0 : Ad
The PERC controller looks after bad block reassignment.
Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn
-Original Message-
From: Kit Gerrits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 11:44 AM
To: Salyzyn, Mark
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: Disk errors
Indeed, I had an entire
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 10:22 AM
To: Cress, Andrew R; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: Disk errors
Andrew,
Thanks for explaining the initial vs grown error list.
Unfortunately, the tool itself monitors softwareRAID and SCSI devices.
This means that sgmode itself sees only the con
all!
Kit
> -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
> Van: Salyzyn, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Verzonden: maandag 31 januari 2005 17:03
> Aan: Kit Gerrits
> Onderwerp: RE: Disk errors
>
> You get tones of I/O error messages from the filesystem
> driver once the device goes
Thanks for the info
Kit
> -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
> Van: Cress, Andrew R [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Verzonden: maandag 31 januari 2005 15:46
> Aan: Kit Gerrits; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> Onderwerp: RE: Disk errors
>
> Kit,
>
> With the gro
csi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Disk errors
Exactly how many errors is a SCSI disk allowed to have?
I have a PE2400 with a PERC2/Si with 4x9GB
My disks show:
AFA0> disk show defects 0
Executing: disk show defects (ID=0)
Number of PRIMARY defects on drive: 1912
Number of GROWN defects on drive: 0
A
Exactly how many errors is a SCSI disk allowed to have?
I have a PE2400 with a PERC2/Si with 4x9GB
My disks show:
AFA0> disk show defects 0
Executing: disk show defects (ID=0)
Number of PRIMARY defects on drive: 1912
Number of GROWN defects on drive: 0
AFA0> disk show defects 1
Executing: disk s
20 matches
Mail list logo
