Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 06 Jan 2007 13:01:12 -0600 | From | Robert Hancock <> | Subject | Re: libata error handling |
| |
Kasper Sandberg wrote: > On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 12:21 -0600, Robert Hancock wrote: >> Kasper Sandberg wrote: >>> i have heard that libata has much better error handling (this is what >>> made me try it), and from initial observations, that appears to be very >>> true, however, im wondering, is there something i can do to get >>> extremely verbose information from libata? for example if it corrects >>> errors? cause i'd really like to know if it still happens, and if i >>> perhaps get corruption as before, even though not severe. >> Any errors, timeouts or retries would be showing up in dmesg.. > how sure can i be of this? is it 100% sure that i have not encountered > this error then?
Pretty sure, I'm quite certain libata never does any silent error recovery..
-- Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@nospamshaw.ca Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |