xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick?

To: Tim Soderstrom <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick?
From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:45:42 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Alan Piszcz <ap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <30463798-7ACB-4248-8CDC-CEFCB6ABC0BE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1103181104020.30018@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <30463798-7ACB-4248-8CDC-CEFCB6ABC0BE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)


On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, Tim Soderstrom wrote:


On Mar 18, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Justin Piszcz wrote:

Hi,

I can write to just about the entire USB stick, with no errors:

atom:~# df -h
Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda2             5.8G  1.5G  4.3G  26% /
tmpfs                 2.0G     0  2.0G   0% /lib/init/rw
udev                   10M  140K  9.9M   2% /dev
tmpfs                 2.0G     0  2.0G   0% /dev/shm
atom:~# cd /
atom:/# ls
bin   cdrom  etc   lib    media  nfs  proc  sbin     srv  tmp  var
boot  dev    home  lib64  mnt    opt  root  selinux  sys  usr
atom:/# dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile bs=1M count=4000
4000+0 records in
4000+0 records out
4194304000 bytes (4.2 GB) copied, 135.536 s, 30.9 MB/s
atom:/# df -h
Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda2             5.8G  5.4G  350M  95% /
tmpfs                 2.0G     0  2.0G   0% /lib/init/rw
udev                   10M  140K  9.9M   2% /dev
tmpfs                 2.0G     0  2.0G   0% /dev/shm
atom:/# rm bigfile

However, after some amount of time, the errors occur below, is this USB
stick failing?  Since it has no SMART, is there any other way to verify
the 'health' of a USB stick?

What prompted you to go with XFS over, say, ext2? The journal will generally 
cause quite a bit more writes onto your USB device. I use ext2 on my CF card in 
my NAS for that reason (the spinning media is on XFS of course). I know that's 
not an answer to your problem but thought I would add it as a suggestion :)


Hi,

Just habit I suppose.. (XFS).  Looks like EXT2 is the correct solution here,
or ext4 w/nojournal (if Google's patch is in the kernel).  I have to read
the lwn.net article though.

Justin

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>