lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1 / SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
From Brian's earlier e-mail:

> > I filed this kernel bug:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462425


On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote:

> I could not agree more.
>
> CC'ing the relevant mailing lists to see if someone out there has any idea
> what more we could do as this has been affecting you (more so than myself,
> but I would still like to get some sort of resolution as well, as it still
> happens to me too):
>
> Similar, but not the same issue:
>
> Sep 17 20:20:05 p34 kernel: [1422169.440538] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0
> SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen
> Sep 17 20:20:05 p34 kernel: [1422169.440549] ata5.00: cmd
> b0/d8:00:00:4f:c2/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0
> Sep 17 20:20:05 p34 kernel: [1422169.440551] res
> 40/00:ff:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask 0x4 (timeout)
> Sep 17 20:20:05 p34 kernel: [1422169.440556] ata5.00: status: { DRDY }
> Sep 17 20:20:05 p34 kernel: [1422169.440561] ata5: hard resetting link
> Sep 17 20:20:06 p34 kernel: [1422169.744980] ata5: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps
> (SStatus 123 SControl 300)
> Sep 17 20:20:06 p34 kernel: [1422169.770448] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/133
> Sep 17 20:20:06 p34 kernel: [1422169.770461] ata5: EH complete
>
> (2.6.23.3) above
>
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Brian Rademacher wrote:
>
>> Works fine...Also works under heavy load with only 4 drives. I could only
>> get it to fail by doing a raid resync with 4 drives, except for the newer
>> kernel, which dies pretty easily..
>>
>> What is really frustrating about it is that short of the bugzilla bug I
>> submitted, I don't know who would be willing to listen...A lot of the
>> google hits when searching "action 0x2 frozen" are related to a particular
>> CDROM drive, or general hardware failure. I really don't think that is the
>> case here, but I bet most of the kernel people think the same thing, so
>> they have no reason to care...
>>
>>
>> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 7:04 AM
>> Subject: Re: Hardware RAID
>>
>>
>>> What about if you just 'stress' one drive?
>>>
>>> 1. dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/null bs=1M &
>>> Does it do it?
>>> 2. Same thing for sdb?
>>>
>>> Justin.
>>>
>>> On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Brian Rademacher wrote:
>>>
>>>> I killed smartd for testing. Other than that, it seems entirely load
>>>> based. Anything disk intensive (backups, raid resync, a bunch of spam
>>>> comes in at once, etc.) makes it fail...
>>>>
>>>> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 6:29 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: Hardware RAID
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> While the error happens for me as well it does NOT happen with that much
>>>>> consistency, if I were you, I would start testing different kernels and
>>>>> run it in single user mode (or as close to it as you can) to see if you
>>>>> can narrow down what is causing it, also boot knoppix and see if it
>>>>> occurs-- ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Justin.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Brian Rademacher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't look like a very powerful RAID card, so I may pass on it. I
>>>>>> don't think it will have the BW to run as fast as the software RAID
>>>>>> currently does since it's only a 64bit/66mhz PCI slot...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hate to do the hardware RAID thing, but this error is killing me:
>>>>>> Sep 21 12:05:19 radfiles kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1
>>>>>> SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
>>>>>> Sep 21 12:32:12 radfiles kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1
>>>>>> SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
>>>>>> Sep 21 12:41:34 radfiles kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1
>>>>>> SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
>>>>>> Sep 21 12:58:22 radfiles kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1
>>>>>> SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
>>>>>> Sep 21 13:11:04 radfiles kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1
>>>>>> SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
>>>>>> Sep 21 13:23:55 radfiles kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1
>>>>>> SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
>>>>>> Sep 21 13:54:23 radfiles kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1
>>>>>> SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
>>>>>> Sep 21 15:15:04 radfiles kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1
>>>>>> SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
>>>>>> Sep 21 15:44:06 radfiles kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1
>>>>>> SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
>>>>>> Sep 21 21:15:12 radfiles kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1
>>>>>> SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And at this point, I can either regress to a 4 drive RAID and don't
>>>>>> update the kernel, or move forward with hardware...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't see a fix coming any time soon, but maybe I'll try one of the
>>>>>> latest F10 kernels just to see if anything has changed...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Justin Piszcz" Sent: Monday,
>>>>>> September 22, 2008 2:05 AM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Hardware RAID
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Sep 2008, Brian Rademacher wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The RAID gods must have been thinking about me. My MB has one of
>>>>>>>> these funny slots and supports ZCR, so for the price I'm going to
>>>>>>>> jump ship. I would guess (and hope) this solves the problem,
>>>>>>>> especially since I'll have to reconstruct the entire array...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://cgi.ebay.com/2113600-R-Adaptec-Serial-ATA-RAID-2025SA-Storage_W0QQitemZ250295938636QQihZ015QQcategoryZ167QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hm cool-- let me know how it goes.
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-22 15:29    [W:0.102 / U:2.620 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site