strange badblocks problem

Ken Moffat ken at kenmoffat.uklinux.net
Wed Jan 14 12:48:40 PST 2004


On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, marnixk wrote:

>
> Hope you have some comments on the fact that mount/unmount seems to
> influence the way the kernel "sees" the partition.

 I imagine that accessing the device directly will inevitably see all of
it, whereas going through the filesystem must limit you to the end of
the fs you are accessing.

> One final point of interest may be the fact that before I discovered this
> problem I had another problem with my harddisk. I suddenly could not
> mount /dev/hda1 anymore (on /) because no superblock could be found (IIRC),
> I then checked the drive for bad blocks and there seemed to be many such
> badblocks. I scanned the drive with the tool provided by the vendor
> (maxtor) and this tool said the disk was bad and that I should return it as
> a warranty claim. Then I did a low-level format and rescanned the disk
> again. Then the tool said the drive was OK and "certified error free".
> After this I was more cautious and I decided I would scan my partitions for
> bad blocks with the badblocks program before installing Linux again, and
> then I discovered the errors that this thread is all about. Strangely when
> I rescan the drive with the maxtor tool it still says the drive is good
> (also checks for badblocks).
>
> Maybe this provides some more context on the possible cause of my
> problems... Very curious what you make of this. Thanks alot so far!
>

 Low-level formats (if you really mean that - I wouldn't know how to do
one on an ide drive) aren't worth the bother.  I think your drive tends
to lose some of the data stored on it: reformat, or just write afresh,
and the new data lasts for a bit, but then it starts to deteriorate, so
that sometimes it's ok [ passes error recovery without you knowing ] and
other times it isn't.  Just my £0.02.

Ken
-- 
This is a job for Riviera Kid!



More information about the lfs-support mailing list