Re: How to change LBA48 addressing capability
On Sat, 2008-07-12 at 09:16 -0700, Les wrote: > The second drive is probably is jumpered to be the slave drive, so with > no master it is not being addressed. There are no jumpers on either the first or the second drive. Both are SATA drives. Only the 3rd drive is an EIDE drive. Dan > > Regards, > Les H > On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 22:40 -0600, Dan Hensley wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 08:25 +, g wrote: > > > Dan Hensley wrote: > > > > There are no jumpers on the drive, and I don't think I've ever had one > > > > > > i would believe bill is leading you in right direction to check drivers > > > between fc6 and f9. > > > > > > maybe even pull down source and contact who wrote them. to lose that much > > > storage, it would have to be something driver related, and a bug that > > > needs > > > looking into. > > > > > > > Well, strange things have happened. During my transition from FC6 to > > F9, I had disconnected a 3rd drive in my system, an EIDE drive. While > > it was disconnected I was experiencing the disk problems with my 2nd > > drive. So I plugged the 3rd drive back in, and now the 2nd drive is > > behaving perfectly. So it seems like this problem is due to some kind > > of strangeness in the BIOS. I have an Asus board. > > > > Oh well. At least it works now. > > > > Dan > > > > > > -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Re: How to change LBA48 addressing capability
The second drive is probably is jumpered to be the slave drive, so with no master it is not being addressed. Regards, Les H On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 22:40 -0600, Dan Hensley wrote: > On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 08:25 +, g wrote: > > Dan Hensley wrote: > > > There are no jumpers on the drive, and I don't think I've ever had one > > > > i would believe bill is leading you in right direction to check drivers > > between fc6 and f9. > > > > maybe even pull down source and contact who wrote them. to lose that much > > storage, it would have to be something driver related, and a bug that needs > > looking into. > > > > Well, strange things have happened. During my transition from FC6 to > F9, I had disconnected a 3rd drive in my system, an EIDE drive. While > it was disconnected I was experiencing the disk problems with my 2nd > drive. So I plugged the 3rd drive back in, and now the 2nd drive is > behaving perfectly. So it seems like this problem is due to some kind > of strangeness in the BIOS. I have an Asus board. > > Oh well. At least it works now. > > Dan > > -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Re: How to change LBA48 addressing capability
On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 06:06 +, g wrote: > Dan Hensley wrote: > > Well, strange things have happened. During my transition from FC6 to > > F9, I had disconnected a 3rd drive in my system, an EIDE drive. While > > it was disconnected I was experiencing the disk problems with my 2nd > > drive. So I plugged the 3rd drive back in, and now the 2nd drive is > > behaving perfectly. So it seems like this problem is due to some kind > > of strangeness in the BIOS. I have an Asus board. > [snip] > > on a curious note, what does 'hdparm -I' now show? Here's my boot drive (the one that always worked): /dev/sda: ATA device, with non-removable media Model Number: WDC WD2500JS-00MHB0 Serial Number: WD-WCANK1038714 Firmware Revision: 02.01C03 Standards: Supported: 7 6 5 4 Likely used: 8 Configuration: Logical max current cylinders 16383 16383 heads 16 16 sectors/track 63 63 -- CHS current addressable sectors: 16514064 LBAuser addressable sectors: 268435455 LBA48 user addressable sectors: 488397168 device size with M = 1024*1024: 238475 MBytes device size with M = 1000*1000: 250059 MBytes (250 GB) Capabilities: LBA, IORDY(can be disabled) Standby timer values: spec'd by Standard, with device specific minimum R/W multiple sector transfer: Max = 16 Current = 16 Recommended acoustic management value: 128, current value: 254 DMA: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 udma5 *udma6 Cycle time: min=120ns recommended=120ns PIO: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4 Cycle time: no flow control=120ns IORDY flow control=120ns Commands/features: Enabled Supported: *SMART feature set Security Mode feature set *Power Management feature set *Write cache *Look-ahead *WRITE_BUFFER command *READ_BUFFER command *NOP cmd *DOWNLOAD_MICROCODE Automatic Acoustic Management feature set *48-bit Address feature set *Device Configuration Overlay feature set *Mandatory FLUSH_CACHE *FLUSH_CACHE_EXT *SMART error logging *SMART self-test *General Purpose Logging feature set *SATA-I signaling speed (1.5Gb/s) *SATA-II signaling speed (3.0Gb/s) *Host-initiated interface power management *Phy event counters *Software settings preservation *SMART Command Transport (SCT) feature set *SCT Long Sector Access (AC1) *SCT LBA Segment Access (AC2) *SCT Error Recovery Control (AC3) *SCT Features Control (AC4) *SCT Data Tables (AC5) unknown 206[12] (vendor specific) Security: supported not enabled not locked frozen not expired: security count not supported: enhanced erase Checksum: correct Now here's the drive that was acting so strange: /dev/sdb: ATA device, with non-removable media Model Number: WDC WD2500KS-00MJB0 Serial Number: WD-WCANKC798286 Firmware Revision: 02.01C03 Standards: Supported: 7 6 5 4 Likely used: 8 Configuration: Logical max current cylinders 16383 16383 heads 16 16 sectors/track 63 63 -- CHS current addressable sectors: 16514064 LBAuser addressable sectors: 268435455 LBA48 user addressable sectors: 488397168 device size with M = 1024*1024: 238475 MBytes device size with M = 1000*1000: 250059 MBytes (250 GB) Capabilities: LBA, IORDY(can be disabled) Standby timer values: spec'd by Standard, with device specific minimum R/W multiple sector transfer: Max = 16 Current = 16 Recommended acoustic management value: 128, current value: 254 DMA: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 udma5 *udma6 Cycle time: min=120ns recommended=120ns PIO: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4 Cycle time: no flow control=120ns IORDY flow control=120ns Commands/features: Enabled Supported: *SMART feature set Security Mode feature set *Power Management feature set *Write cache *Look-ahead *Host Protected Area feature set *WRITE_BUFFER command *READ_BUFFER command *NOP cmd *DOWNLOAD_MICROCODE Power-Up
Re: How to change LBA48 addressing capability
Dan Hensley wrote: Well, strange things have happened. During my transition from FC6 to F9, I had disconnected a 3rd drive in my system, an EIDE drive. While it was disconnected I was experiencing the disk problems with my 2nd drive. So I plugged the 3rd drive back in, and now the 2nd drive is behaving perfectly. So it seems like this problem is due to some kind of strangeness in the BIOS. I have an Asus board. welcome to world of electronics. i have been in electronics for 55 years and electronics still fascinates me when such as this happens. /dev/hda and /dev/hdb indicate they are on primary controller with hda as master and hdb as slave, and jumpered such. on secondary controller, 3rd drive 'should' be master and map as /dev/hdc with a cd/dvd jumper as slave, /dev/hdd, and seen as cdrom0. without a master hard drive, cd/dvd should be jumpered as master. yet i have seen cd/dvd drives jumpered as slave and still work as master in a single drive on controller. even seen as such in bios. now, with drives being set up as scsi devices, it may not hold true and may be what was causing your problem. i say this because after changing from lilo to grub boot loader to get fedora 8 to work, i had an sda drive crash. in replacing, i had to do a bunch of drive swaping and during such, i ended up moving installs between 4 drives to rebuild things to capacity of drives. after getting things back down to 3 drives + dvd drive, i rebooted, reset bios for dvd and tried to boot my main linux installation on drive2. during init, it hung up during drive check on 3rd drive and not get passed it. tired and a little peeved, i decided to drop back from 3 installs and 3 drives to 2 on 2, + 1 cd and 1 dvd drive. after pulling cover and starting to pull 3rd drive connector, i noticed that connector on 3rd drive was not fully seated so i pulled it off and reseated it. reboot and all was well. i can only attribute this to a possible lost of a signal needed during drive check as it was passing bios check. granted, 3 hard drives + 1 dvd drive were listed in bios and fstab and drive checks were looking for it and caught problem, but bios missed for some reason. long story to short, *always*, when swapping hard drives and cd/dvd drives, check _all_ jumpers and cabling before closing case and powering system back up. it was a habit that i got out of, but never again. on a curious note, what does 'hdparm -I' now show? Oh well. At least it works now. that is the main thing and it was a simple fix. i would bet i know what you will also do before you close a case. ;o) later. -- tc,hago. g . in a free world without fences, who needs gates. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Re: How to change LBA48 addressing capability
On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 08:25 +, g wrote: > Dan Hensley wrote: > > There are no jumpers on the drive, and I don't think I've ever had one > > i would believe bill is leading you in right direction to check drivers > between fc6 and f9. > > maybe even pull down source and contact who wrote them. to lose that much > storage, it would have to be something driver related, and a bug that needs > looking into. > Well, strange things have happened. During my transition from FC6 to F9, I had disconnected a 3rd drive in my system, an EIDE drive. While it was disconnected I was experiencing the disk problems with my 2nd drive. So I plugged the 3rd drive back in, and now the 2nd drive is behaving perfectly. So it seems like this problem is due to some kind of strangeness in the BIOS. I have an Asus board. Oh well. At least it works now. Dan -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Re: How to change LBA48 addressing capability
Dan Hensley wrote: There are no jumpers on the drive, and I don't think I've ever had one i would believe bill is leading you in right direction to check drivers between fc6 and f9. maybe even pull down source and contact who wrote them. to lose that much storage, it would have to be something driver related, and a bug that needs looking into. -- tc,hago. g . in a free world without fences, who needs gates. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Re: How to change LBA48 addressing capability
On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 16:28 +0100, Bill Crawford wrote: > 2008/7/8 Dan Hensley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I recently sent an inquiry to this list about fdisk being unable to seek > > one of my two basically identical disks. Both are Western Digital 250Gb > > disks. > > > > Unable to seek on /dev/sdb > > > > This disk operates just fine when booting Fedora Core 6. However, as > > soon as I boot Fedora 9, I get the above error. testdisk seems to > > think /dev/sdb is only 137gb, and hdparm confirms something strange. > > There are two other possibilities: a jumper on the drive is "clipping" > its capacity, and / or the presence of a "host protected area" > effectively doing the same thing. Check for jumpers on the drive, see > if the "libata.ignore_hpa=1" option is still supported by the current > kernel. There are no jumpers on the drive, and I don't think I've ever had one on there. I just checked the documentation on the drive, and since it's an SATA drive the jumpers are for unrelated options. Unfortunately the libata.ignore_hpa=1 option doesn't seem to be supported by the kernel. I'm pretty sure this is a kernel bug. This drive worked flawlessly in FC6. It still works in FC6, because that's what is on that drive, and I can still boot to it. Only when I boot into Fedora 9 does this drive map incorrectly. So it appears that something broke between 2.6.22 and 2.6.25. Dan -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Re: How to change LBA48 addressing capability
2008/7/8 Dan Hensley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I recently sent an inquiry to this list about fdisk being unable to seek > one of my two basically identical disks. Both are Western Digital 250Gb > disks. > > Unable to seek on /dev/sdb > > This disk operates just fine when booting Fedora Core 6. However, as > soon as I boot Fedora 9, I get the above error. testdisk seems to > think /dev/sdb is only 137gb, and hdparm confirms something strange. There are two other possibilities: a jumper on the drive is "clipping" its capacity, and / or the presence of a "host protected area" effectively doing the same thing. Check for jumpers on the drive, see if the "libata.ignore_hpa=1" option is still supported by the current kernel. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Re: How to change LBA48 addressing capability
Tim wrote: On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 20:59 -0600, Dan Hensley wrote: I recently sent an inquiry to this list about fdisk being unable to seek one of my two basically identical disks. Both are Western Digital 250Gb disks. Model Number: WDC WD2500JS-00MHB0 Model Number: WDC WD2500KS-00MJB0 *Not* identical... And my *brief* Googling suggests they're different sizes, but you might want to double check that. my long time experience using western digital agrees with what your googling find. if dan would check wd site he will most likely find physical difference of drives and he is looking at rounded numbers that do not reflect actual physical. also, a drive may be specified as 3 or 4 disks, where in fact it may only be 2 physical. internal cpu of hard drives control what is seen at connector. -- tc,hago. g . in a free world without fences, who needs gates. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Re: How to change LBA48 addressing capability
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 20:59 -0600, Dan Hensley wrote: > I recently sent an inquiry to this list about fdisk being unable to seek > one of my two basically identical disks. Both are Western Digital 250Gb > disks. > > Model Number: WDC WD2500JS-00MHB0 > Model Number: WDC WD2500KS-00MJB0 *Not* identical... And my *brief* Googling suggests they're different sizes, but you might want to double check that. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ uname -r 2.6.25.9-76.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
How to change LBA48 addressing capability
I recently sent an inquiry to this list about fdisk being unable to seek one of my two basically identical disks. Both are Western Digital 250Gb disks. Unable to seek on /dev/sdb This disk operates just fine when booting Fedora Core 6. However, as soon as I boot Fedora 9, I get the above error. testdisk seems to think /dev/sdb is only 137gb, and hdparm confirms something strange. Here is the output from /dev/sda, which is operating correctly in Fedora 9: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# hdparm -I /dev/sda /dev/sda: ATA device, with non-removable media Model Number: WDC WD2500JS-00MHB0 Serial Number: WD-WCANK1038714 Firmware Revision: 02.01C03 Standards: Supported: 7 6 5 4 Likely used: 8 Configuration: Logical max current cylinders 16383 16383 heads 16 16 sectors/track 63 63 -- CHS current addressable sectors: 16514064 LBAuser addressable sectors: 268435455 LBA48 user addressable sectors: 488397168 device size with M = 1024*1024: 238475 MBytes device size with M = 1000*1000: 250059 MBytes (250 GB) Here is the output from /dev/sdb: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# hdparm -I /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: ATA device, with non-removable media Model Number: WDC WD2500KS-00MJB0 Serial Number: WD-WCANKC798286 Firmware Revision: 02.01C03 Standards: Supported: 7 6 5 4 Likely used: 8 Configuration: Logical max current cylinders 16383 16383 heads 16 16 sectors/track 63 63 -- CHS current addressable sectors: 16514064 LBAuser addressable sectors: 268435455 LBA48 user addressable sectors: 268435455 device size with M = 1024*1024: 131071 MBytes device size with M = 1000*1000: 137438 MBytes (137 GB) Why is the LBA48 size not the same for both disks, and how can I correct this? Dan -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
