Is it the case even during the blocking operation where the write op waits for the call return? Even, fsync does not catch the errors. (or alteast in the 2.6.27). I agree with you on the process flow. Will post more testing results and details within a couple of days. - SP On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/13/2010 04:44 PM, s ponnusa wrote: >> >> Had some issues with the libata in 2.6.27 kernel's libata code, but >> believe the issues were fixed in the subsequent versions. Atleast one >> prominent issue was with a Western Digital HDD of 40 GB size. The >> manufacturer specific LBA was 78125000 and was reported as correctly >> in Win32 and DOS applications. But the 2.6.27 kernel was reporting >> ~40000 sectors more. But the problem dissappeared with the 2.6.3x >> kernel and I did not bother to check the patches due to lack of time. >> But still, the write's failure is not being seen by the application. I >> can understand the fact of not checking the media errors during the >> write operation, and had posted a request for a quick suggestions of >> the locations which needs to be changed / checked for the return >> value. ( Should it be handled at the vfs or at the libata code?). Will >> surely update the testing results with the new kernel (Well, not >> exactly as I am not using the latest version though! Currently trying >> with 2.6.31). Thank you all for suggestions. > > It's quite likely for write errors not to be noticed by the application. > Even if the drive does report a write error, the application that wrote the > data could have completed the write and even closed the file or exited > before the data actually gets written to disk. Only if fsync (or related > functions) are called on the file is it guaranteed that the data has been > written out to the drive (and any generated errors should be seen at that > time). > >> - >> SP >> >> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Greg Freemyer<greg.freemyer@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> But really.. isn't "hdparm --security-erase NULL /dev/sdX" good enough >>>> ??? >>>> >>> >>> This thread seems to have died off. If there is a real problem, I >>> hope it picks back up. >>> >>> Mark, as to your question the few times I've tried that the bios on >>> the test machine blocked the command. So it may have some specific >>> utility, but it's a not a generic solution in my mind. >>> >>> Greg >>> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
