[Top] [All Lists]

Re: "badblocks" for XFS?

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: "badblocks" for XFS?
From: "Jonathan F. Dill" <dill@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 13 May 2002 14:04:42 -0400
Cc: Stefan Smietanowski <stesmi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Mike Burger <mburger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux XFS Mailing List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1021311815.3935.206.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: UMBI CARB
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205130653090.3542-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3CDFB2A0.9020700@xxxxxxxxxx> <1021296035.1577.9.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1021311815.3935.206.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
You've got a point there.  When I start seeing bad blocks on the
outside, usually it shows up that whole regions of the disk appear to be
"bad" I think because the head is having trouble seeking to that
region.  The next thing that usually happens is that the drive head
fails altogether.

On Mon, 2002-05-13 at 13:43, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-05-13 at 08:20, Jonathan F. Dill wrote:
> > Is there any way to allocate/mark bad the badblocks with XFS so they
> > won't be used by the filesystem?  SCSI drives usually have their own way
> > to do this internally in the defects list, but AFAIK EIDE drives do not.
> As I understand it, all modern drives do defect management internally,
> remapping data blocks as they go bad.  If you're actually seeing a bad
> block from the outside, that probably means that the drive has run out
> of blocks to remap to, and it's all downhill from there.
> At least, that's the reason I've always given for why filesystems
> shouldn't track bad blocks - that's the drive's job.  If you want data
> integrity, and your drive is showing bad blocks, throw it away and get a
> new one.

"Jonathan F. Dill" (dill@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
UMBI CARB IT Coordinator
Experimental Support Site http://concept.umbi.umd.edu

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>