Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #227145 > unrolled thread

linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector??

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-20 04:40 +0200
    Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2020-09-20 05:20 +0200
    Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2020-09-20 06:00 +0200
      Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-20 07:00 +0200
    Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2020-09-20 08:20 +0200
      Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-20 10:00 +0200
        Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2020-09-20 10:40 +0200
          Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-09-20 10:50 +0200
            Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2020-09-21 06:00 +0200
              Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-09-21 07:30 +0200
              Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2020-09-22 00:20 +0200
          Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-20 11:40 +0200
            Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2020-09-20 14:30 +0200
          Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-22 06:20 +0200
            Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-22 06:50 +0200
              Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2020-09-22 08:50 +0200
                Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-22 12:20 +0200
                  Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-09-22 15:10 +0200
                    Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2020-09-23 00:50 +0200
                  Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2020-09-22 23:00 +0200
                  Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2020-09-23 09:20 +0200
    Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-09-20 10:00 +0200
    Re: linux isn't robust enough to handle bad sector?? Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2020-09-20 18:30 +0200

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#227267

Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> writes:

> Test the Seagate ST3320311CS using the ThinkCentre and Seagate SeaTools 
> Bootable.
>
> it has only exe file, no iso file, you need Windows
> https://www.seagate.com/files/old-support-files/seatools/USBbootSetup-SeaToolsBootable.zip

Actually 7zip can extract the files from that in Linux. So it might be
possible to make a USB stick out of this with some work in Linux. Might
be as simple as copying the extracted files to the stick and installing
syslinux on it.

Then again, as UBCD for example includes this (well, SeaTools for DOS),
why not just download that and have a USB stick with a lot of other
utilities too? Or use the ISO for Seatools for DOS?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227153

	Hi.

On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 02:37:32AM +0000, Long Wind wrote:
> i'm creating FS on problem disk 
> though it has passed short and long tests by smart tooli meet bad sector, mkfs complains foreverCtrl+C can't kill it, what should i do NOW??

> [ 2719.089156] ata4.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen
> [ 2719.089171] ata4.00: failed command: WRITE DMA EXT
> [ 2719.089185] ata4.00: cmd 35/00:00:18:68:e1/00:08:0c:00:00/e0 tag 0 dma 1048576 out
>                         res 40/00:01:01:4f:c2/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask 0x4 (timeout)
> [ 2719.089192] ata4.00: status: { DRDY }

That's not a "bad sector". This is a "bad sector":

Jan 29 07:41:01 xxx kernel: [5687751.356991] sd 0:x:x:x: [sdx] tag#0 FAILED Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE
Jan 29 07:41:01 xxx kernel: [5687751.357016] sd 0:x:x:x: [sdx] tag#0 Sense Key : Medium Error [current]
Jan 29 07:41:01 xxx kernel: [5687751.357024] sd 0:x:x:x: [sdx] tag#0 Add. Sense: Unrecovered read error
Jan 29 07:41:01 xxx kernel: [5687751.357030] sd 0:x:x:x: [sdx] tag#0 CDB: Read(10) 28 00 01 0e f0 80 00 00 80 00
Jan 29 07:41:01 xxx kernel: [5687751.357036] blk_update_request: critical medium error, dev sdx, sector 17756288

And you can easily tell one from another. Yours is saying "timeout".
Mine's saying "critical medium error".

What you're seeing is your drive's firmware is hanging on processing a
certain SCSI command. Could be the drive itself, its firmware, or (as
other helpfully suggested) - the SATA cable,

To answer your question - Linux can handle bad sectors just fine. It's
the failing hardware (especially consumer-quality failing hardware) that
it has difficulties with.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227173

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 9/19/20 10:37 PM, Long Wind wrote:

> i'm creating FS on problem disk
> though it has passed short and long tests by smart tool
> i meet bad sector, mkfs complains forever
> Ctrl+C can't kill it, what should i do NOW??
>
> [ 2719.089156] ata4.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 
> 0x6 frozen
> [ 2719.089171] ata4.00: failed command: WRITE DMA EXT
> [ 2719.089185] ata4.00: cmd 35/00:00:18:68:e1/00:08:0c:00:00/e0 tag 0 
> dma 1048576 out
>                         res 40/00:01:01:4f:c2/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask 
> 0x4 (timeout)
> [ 2719.089192] ata4.00: status: { DRDY }
> [ 2719.089209] ata4: hard resetting link
> [ 2719.404384] ata4: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 310)
> [ 2719.412162] ata4.00: configured for UDMA/33
> [ 2719.412199] ata4: EH complete
> [ 2749.813187] ata4.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 
> 0x6 frozen
> [ 2749.813201] ata4.00: failed command: WRITE DMA EXT
> [ 2749.813208] ata4.00: cmd 35/00:00:18:68:e1/00:08:0c:00:00/e0 tag 0 
> dma 1048576 out
>                         res 40/00:01:01:4f:c2/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask 
> 0x4 (timeout)
> [ 2749.813212] ata4.00: status: { DRDY }

One thing to check is whether part of what's happening is driven by the 
onboard disk driver.  Consumer grade drives try very hard to read bad 
blocks, leading to very long timeouts that drag a machine to its knees.  
(Learned this the hard way, trying to figure out why a server, with 
raided disks, just kept going slower... and slower... and slower.)

By contrast, server-grade drives just give up after the first try - 
letting RAID do its thing.

You might want to check the specs on your drive, and run a deep set of 
diagnostics, starting with the more intrusive smart diagnostics.

Miles Fidelman



-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web