Re: sata_sil24 corruption details

[Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>]

Tejun Heo wrote:
> Greg Freemyer wrote:
>>
>> Tejun,
>>
>> Success report:
>>
>> I did a 80 GB test copy with 2.6.14.1 and a Maxtor 80GB SATA drive and
>> a 3112A.  I had 3 drives connected to my server, one PATA for booting,
>> one PATA for to hold the source data, and the SATA drive.  Let me know
>> if you want want details about the setup.
>>
>> I found no corruption.  Given that my error rate was very low it is
>> possible that the corruption simply did not happen, but for now I'm
>> assuming my earlier issues were either a disk problem or a kernel
>> issue that was resolved by the latest kernel.
>>
>> I'm going to continue to test this setup.  I'll report any problems I 
>> find.
>>
> 
> Hi, Greg.
> 
> I also have been continuing corruption test on 3112 during last two 
> days.  It's being performed on 100GB partition of a 160GB harddisk 
> (samsung hd160jj).  Nine passes of 'badblocks -t random -v -w /dev/sdb2' 
> succeeded without any problem.  To replicate your test, I created a 4GB 
> random file by dd'ing from /dev/urandom in a separate IDE disk and 
> copied it to the partition 24times (24 different files of course), then 
> I md5sum'd all copied files twice.  This test succeeded five times 
> without any problem, and it's in the sixth run now.
> 
> Above badblocks and file copy tests amount to about 1.4TB of writes and 
> 1.9TB of reads without any data corruption.
> 
> Let me know how your test turns out.
> 

The 4G file test has been running through last two days and it finished 
thirteen more runs without any hickup.  So, my 3112 + hd160jj 
combination finshed 9 runs of 'badblocks -t random -v -w' and 22 runs of 
4G file copy & verify twice test.  That's > 3TB of writes and > 5TB of 
reads without any error.

I guess my setup doesn't have the problem you used to experience.  How's 
your testing going?

-- 
tejun