|Summary:||anaconda incorrectly detects bad blocks during installation|
|Product:||[Retired] Red Hat Linux||Reporter:||Josh Willis <jwillis>|
|Component:||e2fsprogs||Assignee:||Florian La Roche <laroche>|
|Status:||CLOSED WORKSFORME||QA Contact:||Jay Turner <jturner>|
|Version:||9||CC:||edfriedmangvs, hugh, srevivo|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2003-06-03 12:43:34 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
Description Josh Willis 2003-04-19 06:35:09 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20030225 Description of problem: When performing a fresh install, I partitioned an existing ext3 filesystem to be /, and selected it for the badblocks check with disk druid. When it ran the check, it got all the way to the end and then said bad blocks were detected, and halted the install. However, on looking at the partition through the rescue disk with both 'e2fsck -c -v' and 'badblocks' directly, there were no bad blocks reported. This was true even when the non-destructive read/write test ('e2fsck -c -c -v') was performed, and held true when using both the e2fsck from RHL 7.3, and that from RHL 9 (1.32). Thus I'm reasonably confident that there aren't really any bad blocks on the disk. Tried this twice, and then just deselected the badblocks check in disk druid and install proceeded. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install RHL 9, selecting manual partitioning with Disk Druid 2. On partition selected for installation (/), choose 'check for bad blocks' 3. Actual Results: At end of badblocks check, installation reported 'Bad blocks found' and aborted the install Expected Results: No bad blocks should have been detected, and installation should have proceeded after badblocks check. Additional info: Hard drive is an IBM DDRS-34560D (SCSI) and relevant partition is /dev/sda1.
Comment 1 Daniel Hammer 2003-04-30 21:20:08 UTC
'Had the same problem today with 2 completely new HDs; both were checked without complains by RHL 8.0 and Mandrake
Comment 2 D. Hugh Redelmeier 2003-05-03 07:26:44 UTC
I've just experienced the same problem on two different machines with two different disks. Both machines were Athlons with recent VIA chipsets (Asus A7V333 and Gigabyte GA-7VAXP motherboards) and large WD hard disks (120G and 80G). The rest of this report will be based on the Gigabyte system experience (because that is what I have at hand as I type this). I was replacing Phoebe on this large extended partition. I told disk druid to use it for /, mkfs the partition (not an upgrade), and check for bad blocks. The installation GUI failed very near the end of checking with the message "Bad blocks have been detected on device /dev/hda8. We do not recommend you use this device. Press <Enter> to reboot your system. [OK]" On console 4, there is an interesting sequence of messages: <6> EXT3 FS 2.4-0.9.19, 19 August 2002 on IDE0(3,8), internal journal <6> EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. <6> attempt to access beyond end of device <6> 03:08: rw=0, want=8385900, limit=8385898 This suggests to me that the badblocks program (run by mke2fs) has a bug: it is trying to access beyond the end of the partition. The partition, according to fdisk, is 8385898+ blocks long (in other words, 16,771,797 sectors of 512 bytes). Why are so few folks reporting this bug? Perhaps it only appears when several factors come together. The partition is quite large: more than 2^32 bytes. Maybe something is reading multiple blocks at once and hits a problem when there are not enough blocks at the end. Supporting this is what console 5 says at the time of the error: Checking for bad blocks in read-only mode From block 0 to 8385898 Checking for bad blocks (read-only test): 838589696/ 8385898 Notice that the numerator of this last "fraction" is nonsensical. I suspect that the last two digits ("96") are duplicated due to some formatting bug. Then this block access looks to be within bounds as long as no more than 2(?) blocks are read at once.
Comment 3 Michael Fulbright 2003-05-20 19:27:09 UTC
Refiling against mke2fs. We are removing bad blocks check from the installation program as it was rarely used and modern hardware handles most correction silently and/or people use RAID for critical data.
Comment 4 Florian La Roche 2003-06-03 12:43:34 UTC
For the report with access beyond the partition, please open a new bug report if the partition code is in fact wrong and the end of the partition is not accessable. This should go against either libparted or against anaconda. For the other reports this sounds like kernel problems reading the drive correctly, but does not look like problems in e2fsprogs. Please file those again with hardware information if you have a reproducable test-case. Thanks a lot for your reports, Florian La Roche
Comment 5 Ed Friedman 2003-07-28 18:56:23 UTC
I have a situation in which I cannot install RedHat 9 onto an IDE hard drive due to errors on the drive during the installation. This computer does not contain critical data, and no RAID is being used. At this point, the only way I see to try to get an install working is to install using RedHat 8 with check for bad blocks, then boot from a Knoppix CD and erase everything in the partition that I just formatted, and finally to install RedHat 9 without formatting that partition. If there is some simpler way to install RedHat 9, please let me know. If this is the only way to install it, then wouldn't it be simpler to keep "check for bad blocks" as a workable option during installation for future releases?