HDD problems causing Kernel panics in Linux/Debian?
in [Linux Hardware]
|
Prev: Upgraded my old Debian box to Kernel 2.6.32, but missing sensors datas and can't compile the latest stable NVIDIA driver.
Next: Logs and dumps for kernel panics to collect and analyze?
From: Yousuf Khan on 6 Mar 2010 14:58 Ant wrote: >> You might want to turn on core dump saves on the machine, if you haven't >> already done so. > > How do I enable core dumps saves for kernel panics? This might be a little old, or not entirely relevant to your distro. HOWTO enable core-dumps - LinuxReviews - Mozilla Firefox chrome://browser/content/browser.xul Look up for your own distro, they may have an easier way to do this, depending what tools are included with your distro. Yousuf Khan
From: Rod Speed on 6 Mar 2010 15:04 Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam(a)plouf.fr.eu.org> wrote > Rod Speed wrote >>> 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 036 Pre-fail Always - 0 >>> 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0 >> Yes, the reallocated sectors are much higher than I >> would continue to use with new hard drives so cheap. > Huh ? From the above, the drive has no reallocated sectors yet, There are 36 reallocated sectors. > and no pending (unreadable) sectors either. Thats not what a pending sector is. > PS : was it useful to quote all the post just to comment on one line ? Yes, I prefer to quote the entire post for those who dont see the post I am replying to or those who prefer to see all of what I am replying to without reading the original.
From: Rod Speed on 6 Mar 2010 15:11 Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam(a)plouf.fr.eu.org> wrote > Rod Speed wote >> Ant wrote >>> 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 036 Pre-fail Always - 0 >>> 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0 >> Yes, the reallocated sectors are much higher than I >> would continue to use with new hard drives so cheap. > Huh ? From the above, the drive has no reallocated sectors yet, Whoops, sorry, my brain fart. > and no pending (unreadable) sectors either. Thats not what pending sectors are. > PS : was it useful to quote all the post just to comment on one line ? Yes, I prefer to quote the entire post for those who dont see the post I am replying to or those who prefer to see all of what I am replying to without reading the original.
From: Pascal Hambourg on 6 Mar 2010 18:40 Rod Speed a �crit : > Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam(a)plouf.fr.eu.org> wrote > >> and no pending (unreadable) sectors either. > > Thats not what pending sectors are. Aren't pending sectors sectors waiting to be remapped because of read errors ? >> PS : was it useful to quote all the post just to comment on one line ? > > Yes, I prefer to quote the entire post for those who dont see the post I am replying > to or those who prefer to see all of what I am replying to without reading the original. I prefer not to have to scroll down through 100 lines to read the reply. A common practice is to quote only what is needed for the reader to understand the context - no more, no less.
From: Rod Speed on 6 Mar 2010 19:50
Pascal Hambourg wrote > Rod Speed wrote >> Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam(a)plouf.fr.eu.org> wrote >>> and no pending (unreadable) sectors either. >> Thats not what pending sectors are. > Aren't pending sectors sectors waiting to be remapped because of read errors ? Thats not the same thing as unreadable sectors. >>> PS : was it useful to quote all the post just to comment on one line ? >> Yes, I prefer to quote the entire post for those who dont see the post I am replying >> to or those who prefer to see all of what I am replying to without reading the original. > I prefer not to have to scroll down through 100 lines to read the reply. And sometimes I top post to avoid that. > A common practice is to quote only what is needed for > the reader to understand the context - no more, no less. I choose not to do what is a common practice of others. I decide for myself what I think is appropriate. |