On Wednesday, 9 November 2022 16:53:13 GMT Laurence Perkins wrote: > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Michael <confabul...@kintzios.com> > >Sent: Wednesday, November 9, 2022 12:47 AM > >To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org > >Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] e2fsck -c when bad blocks are in existing file? > > > >On Tuesday, 8 November 2022 18:24:41 GMT Wols Lists wrote: > > > > > >> MODERN DRIVES SHOULD NEVER HAVE AN OS-LEVEL BADBLOCKS LIST. If they > >> do, something is seriously wrong, because the drive should be hiding > >> it from the OS. > > > > > >If you run badblocks or e2fsck you'll find the application asks to write > >data to the disk, at the end of the run. Yes, the drive's firmware should > >manage badblocks transparently to the filesystem, but I have observed in > >hdparm output reallocations of badblocks do not happen in real time. > >Perhaps the filesystem level badblocks list which is LBA based, acts as an > >intermediate step until the hardware triggers a reallocation? Not sure. > >:-/ > > > > Badblocks doesn't ask to write anything at the end of the run. You tell it > whether you want a read test, a write-read test or a > read-write-read-replace test at the beginning. Not to labour the point, but 'e2fsck -v -c' runs a read test and at the end it informs me "... Updating bad block inode", even if it came across no read errors (0/0/0) and consequently does not prompt for a fs repair.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
