On Friday 05 March 2010, consul tores wrote: > 2010/3/5 David Goodenough <david.goodeno...@btconnect.com>: > > On Friday 05 March 2010, consul tores wrote: > >> 2010/3/5 David Goodenough <david.goodeno...@btconnect.com>: > >> > On Friday 05 March 2010, consul tores wrote: > >> >> 2010/3/4 Mike Dresser <mdresse...@router.windsormachine.com>: > >> >> > On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, David Goodenough wrote: > >> >> >> hda: Host Protected Area detected. > >> >> >> ^Icurrent capacity is 268435455 sectors (137438 MB) > >> >> >> ^Inative capacity is 312581808 sectors (160041 MB) > >> >> > > >> >> > Is this a PATA drive, and from there, has a jumper on the back for > >> >> > LBA48? > >> >> > > >> >> > Mike > >> >> > >> >> The problem does not look related with HD, it is more related to > > > > the > > > >> >> kernel. Anyway, You can use a specific tool which is provided by the > >> >> HDs' company. > >> > > >> > Well the linux tool to do the job is supposed to be hdparm -N, but > >> > that does not work because the correct option is not selected in the > >> > kernel (CONFIG_IDE_TASK_IOCTL). > >> > > >> > David > >> > >> Yes, it is absolutely correct respect to kernel, but the second > >> sentences is related to the HD (hardware). The first one reffers to > >> the kernel. > >> > >> francisco > > > > Are you saying there is a hardware tool provided by Samsung? > > > > Anyway, if you look at bug 572618 you will see the solution, it involves > > two parameters for modules. > > > > David > > Yes, it has been a norm for many brands, in fact, some tools work on > many HDs, but i insist it does not look like a hardware problem, it > looks clearly like kernel problem. > > If i were in this situation again, first thing to check, should be > using the old kernel which worked well. after that, if i have the same > problem, testing the HD with cfdisk, fdisk and sfdisk should be > sufficient to discard a hardware problem; first, reading man pages, > and DO NOT DOING any change, do not writing any thing. Also, there are > Debian tools that work very efficiently as testdisk, smart-tools (i am > not sure), and others to check HDs and recover data. > Actually the problem is (as I have pointed out in the bug report) worse that this, because while the kernel has been updated to take note of the HPA, the tools such as *parted have not. So if your disk has an HPA and you try to partition it using *parted, presumably you will get what looks like a hardware error, and it will make no sense as the sizes reported by *parted are the physical ones, not the HPA reduced ones.
David > francisco. > > "thanks for the information: > bug # 572618. > You should be able to make the kernel ignore the HPA thus: > > 1. Create a file under /etc/modprobe.d containing the lines: > options ide_core nohpa=0.0 > options libata ignore_hpa=1 > 2. Run 'update-initramfs -u -k 2.6.32-2-686' > 3. Reboot > > Ben." > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201003051528.29490.david.goodeno...@btconnect.com
