[clue-tech] Re: kernel drivers (linux kernel: hde: drive_cmd:

[Hex Star]

Here's the results of the extended (2 hour) S.M.A.R.T. test on the
300GB HD in question:


linux:/home/hexstar # smartctl -l selftest /dev/hde
smartctl version 5.30 Copyright (C) 2002-4 Bruce Allen
Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/

=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1
Num  Test_Description    Status                  Remaining 
LifeTime(hours)  LBA_of_first_error
# 1  Extended offline    Completed without error       00%        35         -


It passed fine :-D...I don't know but from what it seems, I think I
can just ignore the errors, nothing bad really seems to be happening
and there doesn't seem to really be any signs pointing to a fact that
there is something troublesome with the HD/installation...if others
here think otherwise please say and so and say why so I can best
understand, thanks, any feedback/input/help is as always greatly
appreciated!

On 1/4/06, Hex Star <hexstar at gmail.com> wrote:
> Btw, what do those errors I'm getting mean anyways? (what does
> task_no_data_intr mean? what does DriveStatusError mean? what does
> this: [powersave_proxy][2336]: WARNING: hdparm returned error 5 mean?
> what does drive_cmd mean? And finally what does DriveReady
> SeekComplete Error mean?) Sorry for the emails, due to gmail
> organizing similar emails in a forum thread like fashion I sometimes
> get carried away and send out alot of emails...anywho could you please
> answer those questions? I'd really like to know what exactly those
> errors are indicating specifically other then the possibility of the
> drive failing, would help me get a better grip on what is going on
> here and I'm sure others as well who may find this via google would
> appreciate knowing. Thanks!
>
> On 1/4/06, Hex Star <hexstar at gmail.com> wrote:
> > oh and note that unlike the person who posted here:
> > http://clue.denver.co.us/pipermail/clue-tech/2004-August/010916.html I
> > am not getting BadCRC errors just errors like these:
> >
> > Jan 3 15:45:05 linux kernel: hde: drive_cmd: status=0x51 { DriveReady
> > SeekComplete Error }
> > Jan 3 15:45:05 linux kernel: hde: drive_cmd: error=0x04 { DriveStatusError }
> > Jan 3 15:45:05 linux kernel: hdf: drive_cmd: status=0x51 { DriveReady
> > SeekComplete Error }
> > Jan 3 15:45:05 linux kernel: hdf: drive_cmd: error=0x04 { DriveStatusError }
> > Jan 3 15:45:05 linux [powersave_proxy][2336]: WARNING: hdparm returned error 5
> > Jan 3 15:45:05 linux kernel: hdf: task_no_data_intr: status=0x51 {
> > DriveReady SeekComplete Error }
> > Jan 3 15:45:05 linux kernel: hdf: task_no_data_intr: error=0x04 {
> > DriveStatusError }
> >
> > ....just thought I'd state that in case there was any confusion that I
> > might've been getting BadCRC errors as well which I'm not :-)
> >
> > On 1/4/06, Hex Star <hexstar at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Running long SMART test on 300GB HD via smartctl -t long -l selftest
> > > /dev/hde , says it'll take 2 hours so I'll give it the time and will
> > > post back the results (hope it passes!)
> > >
> > > On 1/4/06, Hex Star <hexstar at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Not really, the IDE cable in use came with the 300GB HD and the 300GB HD is
> > > > new, any possibility that these errors could be ignored and may be false
> > > > positives caused by some incompatible commands being sent to the ATA
> > > > controller/HD or something like that? IMO it may be a possibility since fsck
> > > > and S.M.A.R.T. didn't find any issues and fsck does tend to be quite
> > > > thorough with it's testing....will run a long SMART test though when I get
> > > > home to see if anything unusual comes up
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 1/4/06, Angelo Bertolli <angelo at freeshell.org> wrote:
> > > > > Hex Star wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >but the weird part is these errors are coming from hdf too, both
> > > > > >connected to the ata controller and I don't beieve that drive is at
> > > > > >all corrupted, so do you think this could be caused by some minor
> > > > > >incompatibilities with suse and the controller card (perhaps
> > > > > >incompatible commands?) and thus it can be ignored
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > Any reason you'd suspect the cables?  I just say that because they're
> > > > > easier to replace.  If you're having a problem with the controller, I
> > > > > guess you'll have to replace the motherboard.
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > CLUE-tech mailing list
> > > > > CLUE-tech at cluedenver.org
> > > > > http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
_______________________________________________
CLUE-tech mailing list
CLUE-tech at cluedenver.org
http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech