From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270800AbTHJXCI (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Aug 2003 19:02:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270801AbTHJXA7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Aug 2003 19:00:59 -0400 Received: from mion.elka.pw.edu.pl ([194.29.160.35]:23504 "EHLO mion.elka.pw.edu.pl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270800AbTHJXAw (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Aug 2003 19:00:52 -0400 From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz To: Jan Niehusmann Subject: Re: uncorrectable ext2 errors Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 01:01:16 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: <20030806150335.GA5430@gondor.com> <20030810231955.A16852@pclin040.win.tue.nl> <20030810213450.GA7050@gondor.com> In-Reply-To: <20030810213450.GA7050@gondor.com> Cc: Andries Brouwer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200308110101.16795.bzolnier@elka.pw.edu.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 10 of August 2003 23:34, Jan Niehusmann wrote: > On Sun, Aug 10, 2003 at 11:19:55PM +0200, Andries Brouwer wrote: > > I see no kernel version in your post, that would be the first thing > > of interest. Next, look at this addressing variable via /proc. > > Sorry - I mentioned it in an earlier post with a different subject. It's > plain 2.4.21. > > > It it is zero, then you are hit by something avoided by the patch > > I sketched yesterday evening or so. Otherwise we must look further. > > It is 0, yes. May it be caused by the following lines in pdc202xx_old.c? > > if (hwif->pci_dev->device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_PROMISE_20265) > hwif->addressing = (hwif->channel) ? 0 : 1; Yes. I did some googling. http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0209.0/0000.html and http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0209.0/0898.html are essential. It looks LBA-48 was disabled on PDC20265 as a "workaround", because there was a stupid in Promise LBA-48 support. Bug was fixed, but "workaround" disabling LBA-48 was never removed. You can remove these two lines and see if it helps (but it may corrupt your fs even more if it doesn't). Because of this bug you are hitting another bug which Andries has described recently. --bartlomiej