Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, David Mansfield wrote:
>
> > Well, I've never gotten a single SCSI error from the controller... not to
> > mention that the block being requested is WAY beyond the end of the
> > device. If this wasn't a RAID device, this would be one of the 'Attempt
> i/o buffers that just gets exacerbated by other problems, heavy I/O, cache
> problems (like overheated CPU), cables, etc.
Overheating CPU's corrupt memory, fail cache coherency and do other things
of that nature.
On an x86 box an overheated CPU is a loose cannon. It can cause almost
anything
PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: LOTS OF BAD STUFF in raid0: raid0145-19990824-2.2.11 is
> unstable
>
>
> I had problems with the "beyond end of device" message quite
> regularly until
> I switched the device from non-RAID to RAID and replaced the CPU.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 1999 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: LOTS OF BAD STUFF in raid0: raid0145-19990824-2.2.11 is
unstable
On Sat, Nov 06, 1999 at 03:44:47PM +0100, Florian
On Sat, Nov 06, 1999 at 03:44:47PM +0100, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
> Easy setup
>
> raid0 of raid5s ...
>
> read:
>
> /dev/md0 raid0 /dev/md1 /dev/md2
> /dev/md1 raid5 scsi disks (tried with 6 and 3)
> /dev/md2 raid5 scsi disks (tried with 6 and 3)
>
> As soon as you initiate a "mke2fs /dev/md
On Fri, Nov 05, 1999 at 12:49:07PM -0500, David Mansfield wrote:
> (system details at bottom, summary 2xPII 450, 2.2.13pre14+raid0145latest)
>
> I am STILL having the same old bug in the raid code/kernel that has
> existed for about 6 months, at least. It no longer oopses because the new
> debug
We saw similar RAID-0 problems a couple of years back and spent the better
part of a month trying to track them down. They eventually went away with
a better motherboard.
Not that it is necessarily your motherboard ... could be RAM, hard drive,
cable, controller, terminator, etc. I've even seen
EMAIL PROTECTED]; Alan Cox
> Subject: Re: LOTS OF BAD STUFF in raid0: raid0145-19990824-2.2.11 is
> unstable
>
>
>
> > it's 99.99% a problem with the disk. The RAID0 code has not had any
> > significant changes (due to it's simplicity) in the last
> couple of y
>
> Of course, it isn't necessarily the same problem, I'm just pointing out that
> we had a problem that looked like this and really looked like it wasn't
> hardware (for the same reasons you listed) but it was, after all.
>
I hate to be so verbose, but I just thought I'd throw one more factoid
> it's 99.99% a problem with the disk. The RAID0 code has not had any
> significant changes (due to it's simplicity) in the last couple of years.
> We never rule out software bugs, but this is one of those cases where it's
> way, way down in the list of potential problem sources.
>
> -- mingo
>
David Mansfield writes:
>Well, I've never gotten a single SCSI error from the controller... not to
>mention that the block being requested is WAY beyond the end of the
>device. If this wasn't a RAID device, this would be one of the 'Attempt
>to access beyond end of device' errors that non-raid
On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, David Mansfield wrote:
> Well, I've never gotten a single SCSI error from the controller... not to
> mention that the block being requested is WAY beyond the end of the
> device. If this wasn't a RAID device, this would be one of the 'Attempt
> to access beyond end of devic
> David Mansfield writes:
> ...
> >raid0_map bug: hash->zone0==NULL for block 171521844
> >Bad md_map in ll_rw_block
> >EXT2-fs error (device md(9,0)): ext2_free_blocks: Freeing blocks not in
> >datazone - block = 171521844, count = 1
> >raid0_map bug: hash->zone0==NULL for block 959524912
> >Bad
David Mansfield writes:
...
>raid0_map bug: hash->zone0==NULL for block 171521844
>Bad md_map in ll_rw_block
>EXT2-fs error (device md(9,0)): ext2_free_blocks: Freeing blocks not in
>datazone - block = 171521844, count = 1
>raid0_map bug: hash->zone0==NULL for block 959524912
>Bad md_map in ll_rw
(system details at bottom, summary 2xPII 450, 2.2.13pre14+raid0145latest)
I am STILL having the same old bug in the raid code/kernel that has
existed for about 6 months, at least. It no longer oopses because the new
debug code that checks for this (that I suggested BTW, and others have
triggere
15 matches
Mail list logo
