linux-ext4 - Re: Weird I/O errors with USB hard drive not remounting filesystem readonly

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20091124222334.GB20245@roll>
Date:	Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:23:34 -0500
From:	tmhikaru@...il.com
To:	tmhikaru@...il.com
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
	Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	SCSI development list <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Weird I/O errors with USB hard drive not remounting filesystem readonly

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 04:50:44PM -0500, tmhikaru@...il.com wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 09:39:44PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 24-11-09 15:13:01, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > 
> > > >   After digging in block layer code, it's as we suspected:
> > > > In case of host error DID_ERROR (which is our case), scsi request is
> > > > retried iff it is not a FAILFAST request which is set if bio is doing
> > > > readahead... So this is explained and everything behaves as it should.
> > > > Thanks everybody involved :).
> > > 
> > > Okay, very good.  There remains the question of the disturbing error
> > > messages in the system log.  Should they be supressed for FAILFAST
> > > requests?
> >   I think it's useful they are there because ultimately, something really
> > went wrong and you should better investigate. BTW, "end_request: I/O error"
> > messages are in the log even for requests where we retried and succeeded...
> > 
> > 								Honza
> 
> While I agree it is useful information, I think that if the error messages
> are going to be printed, you should *also* print that this is a NON FATAL
> error and that it's going to be retried. It'd help diagnosing the path it's
> following through the failure code IMHO as well as not making users
> completely freak out like I did in my case. It is *not* particularly obvious
> given the message printed to syslog what is going wrong or why.
> 
> 	Just my opinion,
> 	Tim McGrath

	I should have asked since I'm here at the moment - do you need any
more information out of the buggy USB enclosure at the moment, or can I work
on trying to fix/replace it now?

Tim McGrath
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html