Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*2\.6\.38\:\s+XFS\/USB\/HW\s+issue\,\s+or\s+failing\s+USB\s+stick\?\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:08:40 -0400 (EDT)
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
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00182.html (12,854 bytes)

2. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Tim Soderstrom <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:19:05 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00183.html (9,687 bytes)

3. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:39:26 -0400 (EDT)
None that I know of. The stick didn't "fail" in any obvious way, but for some reason it was disconnected from the USB bus. (If it initiated that disconnect by itself, I guess you could consider that
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00184.html (10,527 bytes)

4. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:59:46 +0100
Using ext2 on flash media instead of ext3 or other file systems is recommended a lot, but the situation is actually much more complex. In https://lwn.net/Articles/428584/, I explain how these things
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00186.html (10,284 bytes)

5. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Tim Soderstrom <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 11:20:01 -0500
Wow that's a great article, thanks for the link! Tim
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00187.html (9,517 bytes)

6. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:45:34 -0400 (EDT)
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 wi
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00188.html (16,791 bytes)

7. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:45:42 -0400 (EDT)
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
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00189.html (11,492 bytes)

8. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:47:45 -0400 (EDT)
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
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00190.html (14,064 bytes)

9. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 20:10:37 +0100
Ok, so no immediate problem there. I'm sorry, I should have been more specific. Unfortunately, running flashbench is not very user friendly yet. The results indicate that the device does not have a 2
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00192.html (16,500 bytes)

10. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:26:46 -0400 (EDT)
On Friday 18 March 2011 18:45:34 Justin Piszcz wrote: On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote: Getting back to the rogiinal question, I'd recommend testing the stick by doing raw accesses instead o
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00193.html (17,891 bytes)

11. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:26:52 -0400 (EDT)
Then something else caused the disconnection. Maybe a bug in the USB stick's firmware. No. Okay, go ahead and see what happens. Alan Stern
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00194.html (10,335 bytes)

12. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 20:33:02 +0100
Ok. Did you make sure to get the partition table right? It's rather tricky with fdisk, since it normally doesn't align to 4 MB. You can see this using 'fdisk -l -u /dev/sda'. Added now, thanks! Do yo
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00196.html (10,806 bytes)

13. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:51:47 -0400 (EDT)
On Friday 18 March 2011 20:26:46 Justin Piszcz wrote: The numbers are jumping around a bit with the incorrectly guessed erasesize. These values should be more like the ones in the first test. Can yo
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00197.html (12,621 bytes)

14. Re: 2.6.38: XFS/USB/HW issue, or failing USB stick? (score: 1)
Author: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 21:11:43 +0100
Ok, so it has the normal 1 MB alignment. That is not too bad then, no immediate reason to reformat, because ext2 doesn't understand the concept of erase blocks. If the partition was completely misali
/archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00198.html (11,321 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu