Wtr.: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic

Wtr.: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic

[rudekjan]

i'm again... here are some more informations. i haven't encrypted my data and the error above the reiser4 panic is:

end_request: I/O error, dev sdb, sector 64412

hope thats help finding the bug

greets

Jan

----- weitergeleitete Nachricht ---------


Subject: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic
Date: Di 31 Jan 2006 01:49:38 CET
From: rudekjan@freenet.de

> Hi,
> i have the same Problem witch 2.6.16-rc1 with the reiser4 Patch from
> ftp.namesys.com.
> Same error and the System is frozen to. But I wanted to copy data from
> Partition A (Reiser3) to Partition B (Reiser4).
> 
> greets
> 
> Jan
> 
> From: "Vladimir V. Saveliev" <vs@namesys.com>
>         To: Ps <Ps_Mail@freenet.de>
>         Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:29:18 +0300
>         Subject: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic
>         Hello
>         
>         On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 11:44 +0100, Ps wrote:
>         > Hi,
>         >
>         > i've got a kernel panic with kernel 2.6.15.1 + reiser4 patch from
>         > ftp.namesys.com, when writing data to a usb harddisk.
>         >
>         > kernel output:
>         > loop4: loop_end_io_transfer err=-95 bi_rw=0x5 
>         > reiser4 panicked cowardly: reiser4[pdflush(6748)]:
> commit_current_atom
>         > (fs/reiser4/txnmgr.c:1130)[zam-597]
>         > write log failed (-5)
>         >
>         > reiser4 panicked cowardly: reiser4[pdflush(6748)]:
> commit_current_atom 
>         > (fs/reiser4/txnmgr.c:1130)[zam-597]
>         > write log failed (-5)
>         >
>         > and the machine is *frozen*
>         >
>         > the harddisk is encrypted via loop-aes v3.1c (loop4). i think it's
> a
>         > reiser4 or kernel 2.6.15 bug, because loop-aes with kernel <2.6.15
> is
>         > running quite perfekt. fsck.reiser4 1.0.5 says the filesystem is
> clear.
>         >
>         
>         can you reproduce the problem?
>         
>         > Best Regards,
>         > Patrick 
>         >
>         >
>         
> 
> 
> 
> "Jetzt Handykosten senken mit klarmobil - 14 Ct./Min.! Hier klicken"
> www.klarmobil.de/index.html?pid=73025
> 
> 



---- weitergeleitete Nachricht Ende ----




"Jetzt Handykosten senken mit klarmobil - 14 Ct./Min.! Hier klicken"
www.klarmobil.de/index.html?pid=73025

Re: Wtr.: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic

[Hans Reiser]

Wow, are we at last actually stable enough that hardware errors are more
of a problem than software errors for our Reiser4 users?

Rudekjan, you have a bad sector, buy a new drive, use dd_rescue to copy
to it, don't run reiser4.fsck until you get the data onto the new
drive.  Why buy a new drive?  Because after the first user visible bad
sector, your odds of more bad sectors over time go WAY up.  Your
time+data are too valuable.....

Hans

rudekjan@freenet.de wrote:

>i'm again... here are some more informations. i haven't encrypted my data and the error above the reiser4 panic is:
>
>end_request: I/O error, dev sdb, sector 64412
>
>hope thats help finding the bug
>
>greets
>
>Jan
>
>----- weitergeleitete Nachricht ---------
>
>
>Subject: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic
>Date: Di 31 Jan 2006 01:49:38 CET
>From: rudekjan@freenet.de
>
>  
>
>>Hi,
>>i have the same Problem witch 2.6.16-rc1 with the reiser4 Patch from
>>ftp.namesys.com.
>>Same error and the System is frozen to. But I wanted to copy data from
>>Partition A (Reiser3) to Partition B (Reiser4).
>>
>>greets
>>
>>Jan
>>
>>From: "Vladimir V. Saveliev" <vs@namesys.com>
>>        To: Ps <Ps_Mail@freenet.de>
>>        Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:29:18 +0300
>>        Subject: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic
>>        Hello
>>        
>>        On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 11:44 +0100, Ps wrote:
>>        > Hi,
>>        >
>>        > i've got a kernel panic with kernel 2.6.15.1 + reiser4 patch from
>>        > ftp.namesys.com, when writing data to a usb harddisk.
>>        >
>>        > kernel output:
>>        > loop4: loop_end_io_transfer err=-95 bi_rw=0x5 
>>        > reiser4 panicked cowardly: reiser4[pdflush(6748)]:
>>commit_current_atom
>>        > (fs/reiser4/txnmgr.c:1130)[zam-597]
>>        > write log failed (-5)
>>        >
>>        > reiser4 panicked cowardly: reiser4[pdflush(6748)]:
>>commit_current_atom 
>>        > (fs/reiser4/txnmgr.c:1130)[zam-597]
>>        > write log failed (-5)
>>        >
>>        > and the machine is *frozen*
>>        >
>>        > the harddisk is encrypted via loop-aes v3.1c (loop4). i think it's
>>a
>>        > reiser4 or kernel 2.6.15 bug, because loop-aes with kernel <2.6.15
>>is
>>        > running quite perfekt. fsck.reiser4 1.0.5 says the filesystem is
>>clear.
>>        >
>>        
>>        can you reproduce the problem?
>>        
>>        > Best Regards,
>>        > Patrick 
>>        >
>>        >
>>        
>>
>>
>>
>>"Jetzt Handykosten senken mit klarmobil - 14 Ct./Min.! Hier klicken"
>>www.klarmobil.de/index.html?pid=73025
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>---- weitergeleitete Nachricht Ende ----
>
>
>
>
>"Jetzt Handykosten senken mit klarmobil - 14 Ct./Min.! Hier klicken"
>www.klarmobil.de/index.html?pid=73025
>
>
>
>  
>

Re: Wtr.: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic

[Clay Barnes]

To amplify what Hans (accurately) wrote, once you see bad sectors, that 
means that you already have many more than you see, and that your hard 
drive is all out of spare sectors to silently swap out for when it finds 
one.

Basically, there's so much wrong with the surface that your hard drive 
can't hide any more flaws, and has given up trying.

Hans is right:  If you see a single bad sector, the drive is considered 
unsafe and trash for even the tightest owner.

--Clay

Hans Reiser wrote:
> Wow, are we at last actually stable enough that hardware errors are more
> of a problem than software errors for our Reiser4 users?
>
> Rudekjan, you have a bad sector, buy a new drive, use dd_rescue to copy
> to it, don't run reiser4.fsck until you get the data onto the new
> drive.  Why buy a new drive?  Because after the first user visible bad
> sector, your odds of more bad sectors over time go WAY up.  Your
> time+data are too valuable.....
>
> Hans
>
> rudekjan@freenet.de wrote:
>
>   
>> i'm again... here are some more informations. i haven't encrypted my data and the error above the reiser4 panic is:
>>
>> end_request: I/O error, dev sdb, sector 64412
>>
>> hope thats help finding the bug
>>
>> greets
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> ----- weitergeleitete Nachricht ---------
>>
>>
>> Subject: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic
>> Date: Di 31 Jan 2006 01:49:38 CET
>> From: rudekjan@freenet.de
>>
>>  
>>
>>     
>>> Hi,
>>> i have the same Problem witch 2.6.16-rc1 with the reiser4 Patch from
>>> ftp.namesys.com.
>>> Same error and the System is frozen to. But I wanted to copy data from
>>> Partition A (Reiser3) to Partition B (Reiser4).
>>>
>>> greets
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>> From: "Vladimir V. Saveliev" <vs@namesys.com>
>>>        To: Ps <Ps_Mail@freenet.de>
>>>        Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:29:18 +0300
>>>        Subject: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic
>>>        Hello
>>>        
>>>        On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 11:44 +0100, Ps wrote:
>>>        > Hi,
>>>        >
>>>        > i've got a kernel panic with kernel 2.6.15.1 + reiser4 patch from
>>>        > ftp.namesys.com, when writing data to a usb harddisk.
>>>        >
>>>        > kernel output:
>>>        > loop4: loop_end_io_transfer err=-95 bi_rw=0x5 
>>>        > reiser4 panicked cowardly: reiser4[pdflush(6748)]:
>>> commit_current_atom
>>>        > (fs/reiser4/txnmgr.c:1130)[zam-597]
>>>        > write log failed (-5)
>>>        >
>>>        > reiser4 panicked cowardly: reiser4[pdflush(6748)]:
>>> commit_current_atom 
>>>        > (fs/reiser4/txnmgr.c:1130)[zam-597]
>>>        > write log failed (-5)
>>>        >
>>>        > and the machine is *frozen*
>>>        >
>>>        > the harddisk is encrypted via loop-aes v3.1c (loop4). i think it's
>>> a
>>>        > reiser4 or kernel 2.6.15 bug, because loop-aes with kernel <2.6.15
>>> is
>>>        > running quite perfekt. fsck.reiser4 1.0.5 says the filesystem is
>>> clear.
>>>        >
>>>        
>>>        can you reproduce the problem?
>>>        
>>>        > Best Regards,
>>>        > Patrick 
>>>        >
>>>        >
>>>        
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jetzt Handykosten senken mit klarmobil - 14 Ct./Min.! Hier klicken"
>>> www.klarmobil.de/index.html?pid=73025
>>>
>>>
>>>    
>>>
>>>       
>>
>> ---- weitergeleitete Nachricht Ende ----
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Jetzt Handykosten senken mit klarmobil - 14 Ct./Min.! Hier klicken"
>> www.klarmobil.de/index.html?pid=73025
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>     
>
>
>   

Re: Wtr.: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic

[Jonathan Briggs]

Clay Barnes wrote:
> To amplify what Hans (accurately) wrote, once you see bad sectors,
> that means that you already have many more than you see, and that your
> hard drive is all out of spare sectors to silently swap out for when
> it finds one.
>
> Basically, there's so much wrong with the surface that your hard drive
> can't hide any more flaws, and has given up trying.
>
> Hans is right:  If you see a single bad sector, the drive is
> considered unsafe and trash for even the tightest owner.
I don't believe that's quite true.  It's my understanding that a drive
may have a correctable read error.  The data may be too damaged to read
from that sector, but rewriting the sector can repair it or remap it to
a new undamaged area.  The drive cannot make up the lost data though, so
it must report the error.

The damage can come from a partial write during power down or from data
that was marginal to start with and hadn't been read in a long time
(Drives will remap sectors even on successful reads, when they have to
use too much error correction to get the data, but don't generally do
full surface sweeps to check.  SMART can be told to do full surface
checks, however.)

Don't take the existence of a single bad sector as proof that the drive
is trash.  Instead, check the SMART status and look at the remap rates
and error rates.  SMART should have a nice summary for you too, either
OK, FAILING or FAILED (or similar phrases).

Re: Wtr.: Re: 2.6.15.1+reiser4 Kernel Panic

[Chet Hosey]

abc1237@freenet.de wrote:

> 	
>
>Hi,
>I don't think that this is an error of the Disc, because I have a brand new Harddisk (2 day's old).
>
>greets
>  
>

I've had new drives fail immediately. It's almost certainly not
cost-effective to fully test each drive before it leaves the factory, so
sometimes bad ones do make it through. I had a series of WD drives a few
years ago all fail within miserably within a few days to a week, for
instance.

If you're seeing I/O errors on a brand new drive, it's worth the effort
to try to have it exchanged with a different unit at the place where you
bought it.

Chet