Re: Blockbusting news, results are in

From: John Bradford (john_at_grabjohn.com)
Date: 10/20/03

  • Next message: Hans Reiser: "Re: Blockbusting news, results are in" 
    Date:	Mon, 20 Oct 2003 08:22:59 +0100
To: jw schultz <jw@pegasys.ws>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

    > What is apparently missing is better handling of the
    > uncorrectable errors. Specifically the ability to pass the
    > errors and warnings up to the OS for evaluation and for the
    > OS to be able to request a block remap or to undo a block
    > remap.

    Why this suggestion keeping coming up, I have no idea. If you take
    the idea to it's extreme, it's basically saying that we should
    off-load all processing on to the host. Although there has been a
    move towards dumb peripherals in recent years, (E.G. software modems),
    I have seen almost no even vaguely convincing arguments other than
    cost as to why they are superior, (lower latency has been mentioned
    with regard to software modems - I fail to see the benefit, although I
    suppose it might exist for games players). Apart from some data
    recovery applications, I don't see how it is possible to do anything
    really useful simply by adding the ability to pass some warnings and
    errors up to the OS, without giving the OS access to all of the data
    that the drive firmware has access to.

    Obviously drives with completely open and free firmware would be
    great, but that is not likely to happen in the near future, so for the
    time being, if you don't like the way drives handle defect management,
    complain to the manufactuers. I am satisfied with the way Maxtor
    disks handle defect management, both Eric's explainations and my own
    observations.

    John.
    -
    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/

  • Next message: Hans Reiser: "Re: Blockbusting news, results are in"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: can I make a reset-at-will box?
      ... Tim (replied back about using a journalling file system): ... >> ignore such warnings, and just carry on hoping for the best. ... One that you ought to fsck, ... drive installation that doesn't *have* to write to drives all the time. ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: Blockbusting news, results are in
      ... Specifically the ability to pass the ... >> OS to be able to request a block remap or to undo a block ... > off-load all processing on to the host. ... > time being, if you don't like the way drives handle defect management, ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Restricting RDP access
      ... You might look at these Group Policies for possible help. ... preclude giving the client the ability to copy files from the remote machine to the local client ... I have the ability to ... > to the drives on their work machines? ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.work_remotely)
    • Odd error generated by external USB drives (Warning 51)
      ... I have two external USB drives. ... disc was not being used for any reading or writing at all. ... Neither drive have a windows page file - so it must be ordinaryaccess to the ... drives causing the warnings to pop up. ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)
    • Re: SMART Failure Predicted?
      ... System: WinXP home, SP2 ... "SMART Failure Predicted on Primary Master: ... drives lasted for a few days after the warnings first appeared, ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)