SATA errors on CentOS 5.2

11-03-2008, 11:41 PM

We have a new machine here that we are trying to use for CentOS as a
base for our primary application. Although I do not have direct
access to the physical machine, I have begun looking into it remotely
(via ssh) to see why we are getting the following errors periodically:

/var/log/messages.1-Nov 1 18:19:00 Centos5 kernel: hda: status
timeout: status=0xd0 { Busy }
/var/log/messages.1:Nov 1 18:19:00 Centos5 kernel: ide: failed opcode
was: unknown
/var/log/messages.1-Nov 1 18:19:00 Centos5 kernel: hda: no DRQ after
issuing MULTWRITE_EXT
/var/log/messages.1-Nov 1 18:19:00 Centos5 kernel: ide0: reset: success

This happened 12 times (at least) in the last four days, and it
(reportedly) does not occur if FC9 is booted on that machine.

The machine is configured as follows:

Pentium Core 2 Duo at 3.4GHz, 1GB RAM
Intel m/b, not sure exactly which one, but here's what lspci shows:

00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation 82Q963/Q965 Memory Controller
Hub (rev 02)
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82Q963/Q965
Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 02)
00:1a.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB
UHCI Controller #4 (rev 02)
00:1a.1 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB
UHCI Controller #5 (rev 02)
00:1a.7 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB2
EHCI Controller #2 (rev 02)
00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) HD Audio
Controller (rev 02)
00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) PCI Express
Port 1 (rev 02)
00:1c.4 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) PCI Express
Port 5 (rev 02)
00:1c.5 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) PCI Express
Port 6 (rev 02)
00:1d.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB
UHCI Controller #1 (rev 02)
00:1d.1 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB
UHCI Controller #2 (rev 02)
00:1d.2 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB
UHCI Controller #3 (rev 02)
00:1d.7 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) USB2
EHCI Controller #1 (rev 02)
00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 PCI Bridge (rev f2)
00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corporation 82801HO (ICH8DO) LPC Interface
Controller (rev 02)
00:1f.2 IDE interface: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) 4 port
SATA IDE Controller (rev 02)
00:1f.5 IDE interface: Intel Corporation 82801H (ICH8 Family) 2 port
SATA IDE Controller (rev 02)
02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82573L Gigabit Ethernet
Controller
03:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82573L Gigabit Ethernet
Controller
04:0c.0 Multimedia controller: Philips Semiconductors SAA7146 (rev 01)
04:0d.0 Multimedia controller: Philips Semiconductors SAA7146 (rev 01)
04:0e.0 Communication controller: Comtrol Corporation RocketPort 16
port w/external I/F (rev 04)
04:0f.0 Non-VGA unclassified device: PLX Technology, Inc. PCI <->
IOBus Bridge (rev 01)

The disk is a Seagate ST3250310NS (250GB) with an 8G /boot, 65G / and
160G /usr, with 2 2G swap partitions in the extended partition (!).

(Seagate - I smell trouble, but, as I said, FC9 doesn't do this at all.)

uname -a returns Linux Centos5.2SATAMaster 2.6.18-92.1.13.el5 #1 SMP
Wed Sep 24 19:33:52 EDT 2008 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux.

I've run the smartctl utility, and it shows no errors.

What am I missing? Is it odd to have two SATA controllers for a
single disk drive, or is that at all relevant?

Thanks.

mhr
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

11-03-2008, 11:57 PM

>/var/log/messages.1-Nov 1 18:19:00 Centos5 kernel: hda: status
>timeout: status=0xd0 { Busy }
>/var/log/messages.1:Nov 1 18:19:00 Centos5 kernel: ide: failed opcode
>was: unknown
>/var/log/messages.1-Nov 1 18:19:00 Centos5 kernel: hda: no DRQ after
>issuing MULTWRITE_EXT
>/var/log/messages.1-Nov 1 18:19:00 Centos5 kernel: ide0: reset: success

Is your Mass Storage Controller configured as IDE instead of AHCI?

>What am I missing? Is it odd to have two SATA controllers for a
>single disk drive, or is that at all relevant?

You don't, it would be odd

What model of mobo?
I would be curious to check the manual, it's been a while since I
worked on an ICH8 chipset so I wonder about the storage config setting.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

11-04-2008, 12:35 AM

On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Joseph L. Casale
<JCasale@activenetwerx.com> wrote:
>
> Is your Mass Storage Controller configured as IDE instead of AHCI?
>
It's "compatible" as IDE.

>>What am I missing? Is it odd to have two SATA controllers for a
>>single disk drive, or is that at all relevant?
>
> You don't, it would be odd

What model of mobo?

Intel PCIE-9650-R11

> I would be curious to check the manual, it's been a while since I
> worked on an ICH8 chipset so I wonder about the storage config setting.
>

Thanks.

mhr
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

11-04-2008, 12:41 AM

On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Joseph L. Casale
<JCasale@activenetwerx.com> wrote:
>>What am I missing? Is it odd to have two SATA controllers for a
>>single disk drive, or is that at all relevant?
>
> You don't, it would be odd

Actually, we do - it is configured to have two SATA controllers in it.

:-)

mhr
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

11-04-2008, 01:07 AM

On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 5:35 PM, MHR <mhullrich@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Joseph L. Casale
> <JCasale@activenetwerx.com> wrote:
>>
>> Is your Mass Storage Controller configured as IDE instead of AHCI?
>>
> It's "compatible" as IDE.
>
It has two settings here - one is "compatible" (the default) or
"enhanced," the other is set to IDE, but can be set to RAID or AHCI.

>> You don't, it would be odd

What model of mobo?
>
> Intel PCIE-9650-R11
>

Actually, it's an industrial backplane with a Cyber Research
PCIE-9650-R11 (B056) V2.0 CPU card in it. That has a P4 on it, not
anything as advanced as Core 2 (my mistake).

Thanks.

mhr
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

11-04-2008, 07:10 AM

MHR wrote:

"enhanced," the other is set to IDE, but can be set to RAID or AHCI.

I've used CentOS5 with many different mobos and SATA. I always configure
SATA to AHCI if the mobo/bios allows it. I have not seen any problems
with AHCI.

A couple machines with both PATA and SATA has brought some issues with
boot order, but nothing that could not be solved by specifying boot
order in the bios.

--

//Morten Torstensen
//Email: morten@mortent.org
//IM: morten.torstensen@gmail.com

I can't listen to that much Wagner. I start getting the urge to conquer
Poland.

-- Woody Allen
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

11-04-2008, 01:39 PM

>>>What am I missing? Is it odd to have two SATA controllers for a
>>>single disk drive, or is that at all relevant?
>>
>> You don't, it would be odd

>
>Actually, we do - it is configured to have two SATA controllers in it.

Heh, Actually you don't "have two SATA controllers for a single disk drive"
but you have two controllers.

As the last poster suggested, use AHCI for Linux.

jlc
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

11-04-2008, 07:45 PM

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:39 AM, Joseph L. Casale
<JCasale@activenetwerx.com> wrote:
>
> Heh, Actually you don't "have two SATA controllers for a single disk drive"
> but you have two controllers.
>
Well, yes, of course! ;-)

> As the last poster suggested, use AHCI for Linux.
>

Interesting. I just spoke with the tech, and he says that he switched
the controller mode from "compatible" to "enhanced" and the errors
haven't happened yet. He said he did try AHCI, but it bombed
(probably because it wasn't set that way when the drive was originally
formatted.

Should we go ahead and reset to AHCI and reinstall (again)? Or will
"enhanced" be enough for the long run?

Thanks.

mhr
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

11-04-2008, 09:09 PM

>Should we go ahead and reset to AHCI and reinstall (again)? Or will
>"enhanced" be enough for the long run?

Enhanced/AHCI for SATA drives under Linux.

Good info here:
http://www.seagate.com/ww//index.jsp?locale=en-US&name=SATA_Troubleshooter_-_BIOS_Configuration&vgnextoid=83744a3cdde5c010VgnV CM100000dd04090aRCRD
jlc
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

11-04-2008, 10:00 PM

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Joseph L. Casale
<JCasale@activenetwerx.com> wrote:
>>Should we go ahead and reset to AHCI and reinstall (again)? Or will
>>"enhanced" be enough for the long run?
>
> Enhanced/AHCI for SATA drives under Linux.
>
> Good info here:
> http://www.seagate.com/ww//index.jsp?locale=en-US&name=SATA_Troubleshooter_-_BIOS_Configuration&vgnextoid=83744a3cdde5c010VgnV CM100000dd04090aRCRD

I got a 404 on that one.

mhr
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos