Subject: Re: two disks, two controlers, same bad block
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Manuel Bouyer <email@example.com>
Date: 03/27/2006 18:40:34
On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 09:36:40AM -0500, George Georgalis wrote:
> >Seagate gets it wrong. 268435455 is 0xfffffff, a valid sector number
> >for LBA but which is not handled properly by seagate firmwares.
> >The workaround is to use LBA48 for this sector number.
> >The attached patch should catch all seagate drives that needs it; it's in
> >current but not in 3.0.
> humm, this is starting to remind me of a similar issue I came
> across in Linux. the patch caused the disk bandwidth to drop by
> about 65%. Is that the case here? I would really prefer to
> mark that block as in use...
I don't know as I don't have such drives here to test. But you could test
But if using LBA48 cause a 65% performance drop for these drives, they're
even more buggy than I though :) Note that LBA48 is required for any sector
Manuel Bouyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference