Messages in this thread | | | From | "Brian Rademacher" <> | Subject | Re: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1 / SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen | Date | Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:59:47 -0600 |
| |
I disabled NCQ and same thing...Just says DMA freeze instead of NCQ freeze...
----- Original Message ----- From: "Gwendal Grignou" <gwendal@google.com> To: "Justin Piszcz" <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com> Cc: "Brian Rademacher" <rad@radfiles.net>; <linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>; <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>; <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 12:14 PM Subject: Re: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1 / SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
> About ata1:0 problem, as reported in the bugzilla bug: I would try to > disable NCQ to see if it helps. Your disks firmware might not fully > support it. > > You can either add the parameter "libata.force=noncq" when loading > your kernel, or set queue_depth to 1 for all the Seagate drives behind > the Marvell MV88SX6081 controller. > > About ata5:0 , someone - in user space probably - is trying to do a > SMART ENABLE operation, but the device ignores it. I don't know which > device you are using, but I assume it does not support ATA SMART > feature set. Timeout is an acceptable but not a nice way to answer, a > cancel would have been better; check if there is a firmware upgrade > for your device. > > Gwendal. > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 6:26 AM, Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com> > wrote: >> 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. >>> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >>
| |