From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 00:42:29 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFB8316A4CE; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 00:42:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from spider.deepcore.dk (cpe.atm2-0-53484.0x50a6c9a6.abnxx9.customer.tele.dk [80.166.201.166]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 324C543F85; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 00:42:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sos@spider.deepcore.dk) Received: from spider.deepcore.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spider.deepcore.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hA78gvxJ000853; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:43:08 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from sos@spider.deepcore.dk) Received: (from sos@localhost) by spider.deepcore.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id hA6MF7TW008919; Thu, 6 Nov 2003 23:15:07 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from sos) From: Soren Schmidt Message-Id: <200311062215.hA6MF7TW008919@spider.deepcore.dk> In-Reply-To: <20031106215849.GA1129@genius.tao.org.uk> To: Josef Karthauser Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 23:15:07 +0100 (CET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99f (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-mail-scanned: by DeepCore Virus & Spam killer v1.3 cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: acd0: FAILURE - READ_BIG status=51 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 08:42:30 -0000 X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 08:42:30 -0000 It seems Josef Karthauser wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. > I've been getting a lot of this kind of error from my cdrom drive on a > variety of disks recently: > > acd0: FAILURE - READ_BIG status=51 sensekey=ILLEGAL REQUEST error=1 > acd0: FAILURE - READ_BIG status=51 sensekey=ILLEGAL REQUEST error=1 > acd0: FAILURE - READ_BIG status=51 sensekey=MEDIUM ERROR error=0 > > Is this a bug in the new atapi code or an indication of a hardware fault > that's just developed? Acutally its fallout from the hacs I had to put into atapi-cd.c to work around deficiencies in GEOM. I might have a better way now, but it needs more testing. -Søren