[ale] SATA drive not recognized by BIOS
Steve Litt
slitt at troubleshooters.com
Thu Oct 26 15:17:46 EDT 2023
If your system is this picky about individual disks, I think you've got
a much worse problem than you think, and your problems is anything but
solved. I'd advise to diagnose this before everything goes to hell in a
handbasket, and for gosh sakes back up very often.
SteveT
Steve Tynor via Ale said on Wed, 25 Oct 2023 15:55:46 +0000
>To follow up on how i managed to solve this... The original failed
>drive was a WD 4T. I tried two different Toshiba drives (8T and 4T)
>and neither were recognized by the Dell BIOS. So I tried WD. Their
>8T was recognized by the BIOS, but its size was misidentified as 0T
>and the kernel refused to recognize it as a valid disk. WD 6T,
>however, worked fine. So I've build a new array with 6T WD. Why the
>WD works and Toshiba didn't will remain a mystery. I don't see
>anything significant in their spec sheets.
>
>In any case, Hurray for RAID1 - I didn't lose any data and didn't have
>to resort to backups.
>
>Steve
>
>
>On 2023-10-15 8:50 PM, Steve Tynor via Ale wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Jim. It's a software RAID via mdadm. The array was
>> originally built with Ubuntu 18 - have kept it going through various
>> system upgrades - now on Ubuntu 22. And you are right - I misspoke
>> when calling it LVM RAID - if my notes are right from back then, I
>> created it via the "full disk" partitions:
>>
>> mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --level=1 --raid-devices=2
>> /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
>>
>> When these errors start happening, it brings the machine to its
>> knees. Anything I can do to "repair" the array to avoid those
>> segments? Even when the errors are happening, mdstat looks healthy:
>>
>> ricotta:~> cat /proc/mdstat
>> Personalities : [raid1] [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid6]
>> [raid5] [raid4] [raid10]
>> md0 : active raid1 sdc1[0] sdb1[1]
>> 3906884608 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]
>> bitmap: 10/30 pages [40KB], 65536KB chunk
>>
>> unused devices: <none>
>>
>> For now I've just removed the errant disk from the array again
>> pending inspiration...
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On 2023-10-15 5:47 PM, Jim Kinney wrote:
>>> The Errors look like the raid recognized a block/segment failure on
>>> sdb and handled it by redirects to a new location and copied in the
>>> data from the mirror.
>>>
>>> Is the the drive bad? Not yet. Sectors do fail in time.
>>>
>>> But raid system specified sdb, not sdb1, so the raid subsystem is
>>> either using the entire drive for sdb or there's a raid controlling
>>> hardware or software that is doing the low level hardware
>>> management and that layer needs to be worked on to recognize the
>>> new drive. It really sounds like there's a raid controller in there
>>> somewhere.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2023, 2:40 PM Steve Tynor via Ale <ale at ale.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> And I guess one more question... I was not able to learn much
>>> about these errors from the interwebs, but perhaps they don't
>>> necessarily suggest an actual drive failure but some sort of
>>> soft problem with the array - perhaps repartition the bad drive and
>>> add it back to the array and hope the errors don't come back?
>>> The errors look scary to me, but most people on this list have a
>>> lot more sysadm chops than I do...
>>>
>>> Oct 13 21:11:48 ricotta kernel: [714090.323895] md/raid1:md0:
>>> read error correct
>>> ed (8 sectors at 7339070832 on sdb1)
>>> Oct 13 21:12:01 ricotta kernel: [714104.108320] md/raid1:md0:
>>> redirecting sector
>>> 7338806424 to other mirror: sdb1
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.347389] ata2.00:
>>> exception Emask 0x0 SAc
>>> t 0x140000 SErr 0x0 action 0x0
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.347501] ata2.00:
>>> irq_stat 0x40000008
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.347558] ata2.00: failed
>>> command: READ FP
>>> DMA QUEUED
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.347621] ata2.00: cmd
>>> 60/78:90:98:5c:71/0
>>> 1:00:b5:01:00/40 tag 18 ncq dma 192512 in
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.347621] res
>>> 41/40:00:88:5d:71/0
>>> 0:00:b5:01:00/00 Emask 0x409 (media error) <F>
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.347809] ata2.00: status:
>>> { DRDY ERR }
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.347860] ata2.00: error:
>>> { UNC }
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.350759] ata2.00:
>>> configured for UDMA/133
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.350801] sd 1:0:0:0:
>>> [sdb] tag#18 FAILED
>>> Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_OK cmd_age=7s
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.350811] sd 1:0:0:0:
>>> [sdb] tag#18 Sense K
>>> ey : Medium Error [current]
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.350817] sd 1:0:0:0:
>>> [sdb] tag#18 Add. Se
>>> nse: Unrecovered read error - auto reallocate failed
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.350824] sd 1:0:0:0:
>>> [sdb] tag#18 CDB: Re
>>> ad(16) 88 00 00 00 00 01 b5 71 5c 98 00 00 01 78 00 00
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.350827]
>>> blk_update_request: I/O error, d
>>> ev sdb, sector 7339072664 op 0x0:(READ) flags 0x0 phys_seg 47
>>> prio class 0
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.351018] md/raid1:md0:
>>> sdb1: rescheduling
>>> sector 7338806424
>>> Oct 13 21:12:09 ricotta kernel: [714111.351111] ata2: EH
>>> complete Oct 13 21:12:20 ricotta kernel: [714122.174015]
>>> md/raid1:md0: redirecting sector
>>> 7338806424 to other mirror: sdb1
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.594981] ata2.00:
>>> exception Emask 0x0 SAc
>>> t 0x1000 SErr 0x0 action 0x0
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.595089] ata2.00:
>>> irq_stat 0x40000008
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.595146] ata2.00: failed
>>> command: READ FP
>>> DMA QUEUED
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.595209] ata2.00: cmd
>>> 60/78:60:98:5c:71/0
>>> 1:00:b5:01:00/40 tag 12 ncq dma 192512 in
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.595209] res
>>> 41/40:00:78:5d:71/0
>>> 0:00:b5:01:00/00 Emask 0x409 (media error) <F>
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.603898] ata2.00: status:
>>> { DRDY ERR }
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.608263] ata2.00: error:
>>> { UNC }
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.615103] ata2.00:
>>> configured for UDMA/133
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.615136] sd 1:0:0:0:
>>> [sdb] tag#12 FAILED
>>> Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_OK cmd_age=4s
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.615145] sd 1:0:0:0:
>>> [sdb] tag#12 Sense K
>>> ey : Medium Error [current]
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.615151] sd 1:0:0:0:
>>> [sdb] tag#12 Add. Se
>>> nse: Unrecovered read error - auto reallocate failed
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.615158] sd 1:0:0:0:
>>> [sdb] tag#12 CDB: Re
>>> ad(16) 88 00 00 00 00 01 b5 71 5c 98 00 00 01 78 00 00
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.615162]
>>> blk_update_request: I/O error, d
>>> ev sdb, sector 7339072664 op 0x0:(READ) flags 0x0 phys_seg 47
>>> prio class 0
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.619470] md/raid1:md0:
>>> sdb1: rescheduling
>>> sector 7338806424
>>> Oct 13 21:12:24 ricotta kernel: [714126.623671] ata2: EH
>>> complete
>>>
>>> On 2023-10-15 3:01 PM, Steve Tynor via Ale wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Forgot to include: the original WD drives are also "AF", so I
>>>> think that rules out sector size incompatibility.
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2023-10-15 2:16 PM, Steve Tynor via Ale wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not certain how to be sure. A quick duckduckgo search
>>>>> suggests that 4k native sector also being marketed as
>>>>> "Advanced Format" - is that right? Looking at the Toshiba spec
>>>>> page, I see AF listed as "Yes" for the 8T (the first drive I
>>>>> tried) and "No" for the 4T (which also didn't work).
>>>>>
>>>>> https://storage.toshiba.com/docs/support-docs/toshiba_n300_salessheet_english_07-27-21.pdf?Status=Master
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2023-10-15 2:08 PM, Robert Tweedy via Ale wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Steve,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Out of curiosity, are the new drives "4K native" sector
>>>>>> drives, and is this the same as the old drives you're
>>>>>> replacing? If the system's old enough its BIOS might not
>>>>>> support that & is expecting to have "512n" (512-native) or
>>>>>> "512e" (512-emulated) sector-size drives.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Other than that, I'm not sure what it could be beyond being
>>>>>> Toshiba brand (which I've personally never had good
>>>>>> experience with, but that's only anecdotal).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Robert
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Ale mailing list
>>>>> Ale at ale.org
>>>>> https://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>>>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>>>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ale mailing list
>>>> Ale at ale.org
>>>> https://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ale mailing list
>>> Ale at ale.org
>>> https://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
>> https://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
SteveT
Steve Litt
Autumn 2023 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century
http://www.troubleshooters.com/rl21
More information about the Ale
mailing list