Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:46:13 +0000 | From | Alan Cox <> | Subject | Re: Problem with ata layer in 2.6.24 |
| |
> The SCSI error reporting really ought to include a simple interpretation > of the error for end users ("The drive doesn't support this command" "A > sector's data got lost" "The drive timed out" "The drive failed" "The > drive is entirely gone"). There's too much similarity between the message > you get when you try a SMART test that doesn't apply to the drive and what > you get when the drive is broken.
That would be the SCSI verbose messages option. I think the Eric Youngdale consortium added it about Linux 1.2. Nowdays its always built that way.
> And it's possible that the error recovery is suboptimal in some cases. It > seems to like resetting drives too much; perhaps if it keeps seeing the > same problem and resetting the drive, it should decide that the drive's > error reporting is just bad and just ignore that error like the old IDE > did (but, in this case, after saying what it's doing).
Nothing like casually praying the users data hasn't gone for a walk is there. If we don't act on them the users don't report them until something really bad occurs so that isn't an option.
Alan
| |