From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751729Ab3FWVlZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:41:25 -0400 Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:57753 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751437Ab3FWVlX (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:41:23 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 809 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:41:23 EDT DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=message-id:date :from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Z92s+/ U03ZmwpFY5ANCM52/QYZIoZuwPZdM0+HjYgyeOXNjfZYL73ctnP2bsghPwl751CQ L3kFYAI+6yTI/0yq9o2TGoRhf7MleUMF9gIAPG0dWBn+biiQBYRziUxx1FeY4+0o fDmOLexBDljkkry/kfLFc7XRkdvhAm82l11dM= Message-ID: <51C76858.4060906@pobox.com> Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:27:52 -0400 From: Mark Lord User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pavel Machek CC: Marcus Overhagen , kernel list , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org Subject: Re: SATA hdd refuses to reallocate a sector? References: <20130623101940.GA4448@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> <20130623112133.GA4837@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> <20130623190003.GA6714@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20130623190003.GA6714@amd.pavel.ucw.cz> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C36A258C-DC4B-11E2-9BD8-D5430E5B5709-82205200!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 13-06-23 03:00 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Thanks for the hint. (Insert rant about hdparm documentation > explaining that it is bad idea, but not telling me _why_ is it bad > idea. Can I expect cache consistency issues after that, or is it just > simple "you are writing to the disk without any checks"? Plus, I guess > documentation should mention what sector number is. I guess sectors > are 512bytes for the old drives, but is it 512 or 4096 for new > drives?) For ATA, use the "logical sector size". For all existing drives out there, that's a 512 byte unit. > ...but it does not do the trick :-(. It behaves strangely as if it was > still cached somewhere. Do I need to turn off the write back cache? No, it works just fine. You probably have more than one bad sector. After you see a read failure, run "smartctl -a" and look at the error logs to see what sector the drive is choking on. Or just low-level format it all with "hdparm --security-erase". Cheers -- Mark Lord Real-Time Remedies Inc. mlord@pobox.com