FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-29-2011, 05:23 PM
Rafał Radecki
 
Default SATA 3TB: unsupported sector size -1548812288.

Hi everyone.

I hava a problem with Debian Lenny server:

uname -a
Linux xxx 2.6.18-4-686-bigmem #1 SMP Wed Feb 21 17:30:22 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux

I connected two new disks to it:

Seagate Constellation ES.2, 3.5', 3TB, SATA/600, 7200RPM, 64MB

BIOS sees them properly as 3TB drives, in shell I have:

brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 32 2011-08-29 19:46 /dev/sdc
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 64 2011-08-29 19:46 /dev/sde

But fdisk doesn't recognize them and demsg shows errors for both:

sde : very big device. try to use READ CAPACITY(16).
sde : unsupported sector size -1548812288.
SCSI device sde: 0 512-byte hdwr sectors (0 MB)
sde: Write Protect is off
sde: Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
SCSI device sde: drive cache: write back
sd 4:0:0:0: Attached scsi disk sde

Has enyone had a similar problem? What is this READ CAPACITY? How can
I correct "unsupported sector size" and why it could occur?

Regards,
Rafal.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAHd9_iSfWQYLSHr7G9_qjx4VsbAjOH43sE5-0rU60j1KYX1cVw@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAHd9_iSfWQYLSHr7G9_qjx4VsbAjOH43sE5-0rU60j1KYX1cVw@mail.gmail.com
 
Old 08-29-2011, 06:32 PM
Stan Hoeppner
 
Default SATA 3TB: unsupported sector size -1548812288.

On 8/29/2011 12:23 PM, Rafał Radecki wrote:

Hi everyone.

I hava a problem with Debian Lenny server:

uname -a
Linux xxx 2.6.18-4-686-bigmem #1 SMP Wed Feb 21 17:30:22 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux


This is an Etch system, unless it was dist upgraded to Lenny without
upgrading the kernel as well. Etch shipped with 2.6.18, Lenny with
2.6.26. Neither kernel version is going to want to play nice with 3TB
drives.



I connected two new disks to it:

Seagate Constellation ES.2, 3.5', 3TB, SATA/600, 7200RPM, 64MB

BIOS sees them properly as 3TB drives, in shell I have:

brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 32 2011-08-29 19:46 /dev/sdc
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 64 2011-08-29 19:46 /dev/sde

But fdisk doesn't recognize them and demsg shows errors for both:

sde : very big device. try to use READ CAPACITY(16).
sde : unsupported sector size -1548812288.
SCSI device sde: 0 512-byte hdwr sectors (0 MB)
sde: Write Protect is off
sde: Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
SCSI device sde: drive cache: write back
sd 4:0:0:0: Attached scsi disk sde

Has enyone had a similar problem? What is this READ CAPACITY? How can
I correct "unsupported sector size" and why it could occur?


I haven't "seen" an issue in this regard because I'm informed enough to
know a 4 year old kernel isn't going to work with 3TB drives, nor 3-4
year old user space disk tools. The error message above actually tells
you the disk is too big for the kernel driver.


Upgrade to Squeeze and the most recent Squeeze kernel. There is no
compatibility or other reason I know of that would force one to stay on
Lenny (or God forbid Etch, if you're still running it). Do


$ cat /etc/debian_version

to determine what dist version you're actually running.

--
Stan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4E5BDB25.3090003@hardwarefreak.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E5BDB25.3090003@hardwarefreak.com
 
Old 08-29-2011, 07:50 PM
Lisi
 
Default SATA 3TB: unsupported sector size -1548812288.

On Monday 29 August 2011 19:32:05 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> There is no
> compatibility or other reason I know of that would force one to stay on
> Lenny

KDE 3.5.10.

Lisi


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201108292050.37407.lisi.reisz@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/201108292050.37407.lisi.reisz@gmail.com
 
Old 08-30-2011, 03:52 AM
Stan Hoeppner
 
Default SATA 3TB: unsupported sector size -1548812288.

On 8/29/2011 2:50 PM, Lisi wrote:

On Monday 29 August 2011 19:32:05 Stan Hoeppner wrote:

There is no
compatibility or other reason I know of that would force one to stay on
Lenny


KDE 3.5.10.


The OP stated the machine with the problem is a server. I would guess
that most *nix sysadmins run servers with only a VGA text console. GUI
compat issues shouldn't be reason to avoid upgrading in this case.


--
Stan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4E5C5E76.9020807@hardwarefreak.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E5C5E76.9020807@hardwarefreak.com
 
Old 08-30-2011, 04:58 AM
Scott Ferguson
 
Default SATA 3TB: unsupported sector size -1548812288.

On 30/08/11 13:52, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

On 8/29/2011 2:50 PM, Lisi wrote:

On Monday 29 August 2011 19:32:05 Stan Hoeppner wrote:

There is no
compatibility or other reason I know of that would force one to stay on
Lenny


KDE 3.5.10.


The OP stated the machine with the problem is a server. I would guess
that most *nix sysadmins run servers with only a VGA text console. GUI
compat issues shouldn't be reason to avoid upgrading in this case.



I'd agree - though it should (and I'd be surprised if it isn't) be
possible to support larger drives by just upgrading the kernel without
upgrading to Squeeze.
I can think of several industry reasons for not upgrading - but I'm
'assuming' they wouldn't apply in an instance where change control and
other policies allowed hardware to be purchased *without* checking for
support first.


I suspect you mean "proper *nix sysadmins"... I come across "sysadmins"
running servers from machines they use as desktops (they also backup to
the same machine).


Cheers

--
"Folks, it's time to evolve. That's why we're troubled. You know why our
institutions are failing us, the church, the state, everything's
failing? It's because, um – they're no longer relevant. We're supposed
to keep evolving. Evolution did not end with us growing opposable
thumbs. You do know that, right? There's another 90 percent of our
brains that we have to illuminate."

— Bill Hicks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4E5C6DED.2060609@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E5C6DED.2060609@gmail.com
 
Old 08-30-2011, 07:54 PM
Stan Hoeppner
 
Default SATA 3TB: unsupported sector size -1548812288.

On 8/29/2011 11:58 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote:

On 30/08/11 13:52, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

On 8/29/2011 2:50 PM, Lisi wrote:

On Monday 29 August 2011 19:32:05 Stan Hoeppner wrote:

There is no
compatibility or other reason I know of that would force one to stay on
Lenny


KDE 3.5.10.


The OP stated the machine with the problem is a server. I would guess
that most *nix sysadmins run servers with only a VGA text console. GUI
compat issues shouldn't be reason to avoid upgrading in this case.



I'd agree - though it should (and I'd be surprised if it isn't) be
possible to support larger drives by just upgrading the kernel without
upgrading to Squeeze.


Oh, it's certainly possible, with a backported or self built kernel, but
most people posting here aren't into rolling their own kernels. If the
OP who posted the question rolls his own kernels he would not have
posted the question.


Also, I've not taken a full dive into the issue of 3TB drive support,
but I'm guessing it would require much newer fdisk, parted, cfdisk, etc
than what ships with Etch or Lenny. These probably haven't been back
ported, so one would have to compile these from source. Again, most
folks aren't into building system utilities such as these from source
and getting them to work properly due to libc version dependencies, etc.



I can think of several industry reasons for not upgrading - but I'm
'assuming' they wouldn't apply in an instance where change control and
other policies allowed hardware to be purchased *without* checking for
support first.


I would make an educated guess that entities exercising system level
change control policies probably aren't using Debian, but using a
commercial distro such as Red Hat or SuSE.



I suspect you mean "proper *nix sysadmins"... I come across "sysadmins"
running servers from machines they use as desktops (they also backup to
the same machine).


Well, the latter aren't sysadmins. There aren't "proper" and
"non-proper" sysadmins, only sysadmins. Such folks as you describe
fall into a lesser category of IT grunt. Feel free to pick your own
name for them.


--
Stan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4E5D3FF0.6050702@hardwarefreak.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E5D3FF0.6050702@hardwarefreak.com
 
Old 08-31-2011, 05:54 AM
Scott Ferguson
 
Default SATA 3TB: unsupported sector size -1548812288.

On 31/08/11 05:54, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

On 8/29/2011 11:58 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote:

On 30/08/11 13:52, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

On 8/29/2011 2:50 PM, Lisi wrote:

On Monday 29 August 2011 19:32:05 Stan Hoeppner wrote:

There is no
compatibility or other reason I know of that would force one to
stay on
Lenny


KDE 3.5.10.


Actually ^^ Lisi(?) that's not a restriction - it can be be run on
Squeeze, and then there's Trinity.


<snipped>


Oh, it's certainly possible, with a backported or self built kernel, but
most people posting here aren't into rolling their own kernels. If the
OP who posted the question rolls his own kernels he would not have
posted the question.


gpd partitions have been supported in kernel for a good while, ext4 is
more recent though.




Also, I've not taken a full dive into the issue of 3TB drive support,
but I'm guessing it would require much newer fdisk, parted, cfdisk, etc
than what ships with Etch or Lenny.


From memory the limit fdisk is/was 4TB - but that is just a (dos)
partition type limitation. gpd has no such restrictions.


<snipped>


I would make an educated guess that entities exercising system level
change control policies probably aren't using Debian, but using a
commercial distro such as Red Hat or SuSE.


Different education system... ;-p

The back-up to the same drive example was a paid support RedHat, though,
unsurprisingly, they saw it as a breach of their SLA - and weren't aware
the production web server was also being used as a desktop :-(


I frequently find Debian deployed in gov departments and defence
contractors - it's also on the list of "approved" builds for the major
telco (who have paid SuSE/Novell support) - seems to be very popular in
engineering divisions.





I suspect you mean "proper *nix sysadmins"... I come across "sysadmins"
running servers from machines they use as desktops (they also backup to
the same machine).


Well, the latter aren't sysadmins. There aren't "proper" and
"non-proper" sysadmins, only sysadmins. Such folks as you describe
fall into a lesser category of IT grunt. Feel free to pick your own name
for them.


:-)
I carefully avoided the word "professional" - to some, being paid means
they are professional. I've also been told Debian is not a professional
OS...


NOTE: I got well side-tracked here - I'm don't know whether the OP's
problem is partition table type, sector size (some new drives use large
sectors?) or some other reason.


Cheers

--
"The definition of black irony is Pro-lifers killing Doctors who do
abortions"

— Bill Hicks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4E5DCC83.90706@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E5DCC83.90706@gmail.com
 
Old 08-31-2011, 10:08 AM
Lisi
 
Default SATA 3TB: unsupported sector size -1548812288.

On Wednesday 31 August 2011 06:54:11 Scott Ferguson wrote:
> >>>>> There is no
> >>>>> compatibility or other reason I know of that would force one to
> >>>>> stay on
> >>>>> Lenny
> >>>>
> >>>> KDE 3.5.10.
>
> Actually ^^ Lisi(?) that's not a restriction - it can be be run on
> Squeeze

How? <skips excitedly>

> and then there's Trinity.

I know. I have a Squeeze box running Trinity, but not my desktop. Trinity is
not yet *completely* production ready, if, like me, you cannot code yourself
out of trouble.

It's already great for many purposes, and I was glad to see the change of
policy from "bring a new version out every six months, willy nilly" so that
problems never really had time to be solved and everything was released at
the beta or even alpha stage ( la Ubuntu (is Ubuntu feminine?) - Timothy
Pearson is a Ubuntu user) to "not released until it is ready".

It is a marvellous project and I follow its progress eagerly. I am really
grateful for the time and trouble of those in it who are able to code. I
would already use it for some of the people whom I support, whose usage is
different from mine. But there are one or two GUI apps that I sometimes use
as root, and most can not be used as root in Trinity.

If necessary, I shall just have to live without them if that is still the
situation when support for Lenny is withdrawn. But I have a few months yet,
and I was intending to raise this issue on the Trinity users list in the near
future.

Lisi


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201108311108.45166.lisi.reisz@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/201108311108.45166.lisi.reisz@gmail.com
 
Old 08-31-2011, 11:35 AM
Scott Ferguson
 
Default SATA 3TB: unsupported sector size -1548812288.

On 31/08/11 20:08, Lisi wrote:

On Wednesday 31 August 2011 06:54:11 Scott Ferguson wrote:

There is no
compatibility or other reason I know of that would force one to
stay on
Lenny


KDE 3.5.10.


Actually ^^ Lisi(?) that's not a restriction - it can be be run on
Squeeze


How?<skips excitedly>

:-) :-D

Well... it's not easy, and probably not sane. Leave it with me for a bit
and I'll dig through my notes and try and write a useful guide.





and then there's Trinity.


I know. I have a Squeeze box running Trinity, but not my desktop. Trinity is
not yet *completely* production ready, if, like me, you cannot code yourself
out of trouble.


I've had it in production of some Asus Eee PC 701SDs for about 6 months
now - no complaints from the users. The only problem I had was that
Konqueror doesn't automatically refresh. In the mean time I've become
very happy with KDE4 (mostly).




It's already great for many purposes, and I was glad to see the change of
policy from "bring a new version out every six months, willy nilly" so that
problems never really had time to be solved and everything was released at
the beta or even alpha stage (* la Ubuntu (is Ubuntu feminine?) - Timothy
Pearson is a Ubuntu user) to "not released until it is ready".


De-coupling from Ubuntu can only be a good thing. The reason people want
Trinity is stability.




It is a marvellous project and I follow its progress eagerly. I am really
grateful for the time and trouble of those in it who are able to code. I
would already use it for some of the people whom I support, whose usage is
different from mine. But there are one or two GUI apps that I sometimes use
as root, and most can not be used as root in Trinity.

If necessary, I shall just have to live without them if that is still the
situation when support for Lenny is withdrawn. But I have a few months yet,
and I was intending to raise this issue on the Trinity users list in the near
future.

Lisi




Agreed that it's a great project (worthy of a donation).
More proof that Open Source is a great development model.

I suspect support for Lenny will run for a long time yet - and for many
purposes a separate firewall will provide security if and when patching
stops (I've heard Sarge is still used on some dedicated devices - and
gets patches from the manufacturers).


Cheers

--
"The definition of black irony is Pro-lifers killing Doctors who do
abortions"

— Bill Hicks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4E5E1C87.6030105@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E5E1C87.6030105@gmail.com
 
Old 09-01-2011, 09:40 AM
Stan Hoeppner
 
Default SATA 3TB: unsupported sector size -1548812288.

On 8/31/2011 12:54 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote:


NOTE: I got well side-tracked here - I'm don't know whether the OP's
problem is partition table type, sector size (some new drives use large
sectors?) or some other reason.


Yes, quite so. Back on topic, this Red Hat bugzilla entry from May 2009
is informative, also dealing with kernel 2.6.18:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502944

The problem in that case was resolved with a patch that:

"Adds support for 16 byte CDBs to the ibmvscsi driver."

As I already suggested, upgrading the kernel will fix the OP's problem.
I simply can't tell the OP how recent a kernel he needs as I don't
know which SATA driver he's using or in what kernel version that driver
was patched with 16 byte CBDs. Upgrading to 2.6.26, the default Lenny
kernel, would probably do the trick. Any Squeeze (2.6.32) kernel would
definitely not have this problem.


--
Stan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4E5F5320.9080009@hardwarefreak.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E5F5320.9080009@hardwarefreak.com
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:30 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org