Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 12:35:33 +0100 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> To: =?UTF-8?B?RGFnLUVybGluZyBTbcO4cmdyYXY=?= <des@des.no> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: A tool for remapping bad sectors in CURRENT? Message-ID: <4BA0BE85.8030206@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <86pr338bak.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <20100308102918.GA5485@localhost> <4B94DDC8.5080008@quip.cz> <20100308115052.GA31896@office.redwerk.com> <4B94FBA6.5090107@quip.cz> <861vfq995i.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4B9BF957.4060507@quip.cz> <86eijn3of2.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4B9CB287.9080205@quip.cz> <86pr338bak.fsf@ds4.des.no>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Miroslav Lachman<000.fbsd@quip.cz> writes: >> The LBA of bad sector is *79725167* [...] s1 starts 63 sectors from >> the beginning of the drive and /var/db has offset 39845888. So am I >> right that I need to find block number *39879105* by findblk command? > > Uh, 79725167 - 63 = 79725104 and 79725104 - 39845888 = 39879216. How > did you arrive at 39879105? I am sorry, it was my confusion. My calculation was for *LBA=79725056* reported in messages: ad4: FAILURE - READ_DMA status=51<READY,DSC,ERROR> error=40<UNCORRECTABLE> LBA=79725056 79725056 - 63 - 39845888 = *39879105* Your calculation is for LBA reported by SMART log 40 51 00 6f 82 c0 44 Error: UNC at LBA = 0x04c0826f = *79725167* That's why I get different result ;) I must pay more attention to the numbers next time! It is interesting that there are two different LBAs for "same" error (appeared at the same time) Miroslav Lachmanhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4BA0BE85.8030206>