# Using RAID0, but getting following boot error:

## Terrax

I get this error from dmesg:

```

ide: failed opcode was: unknown

hdi: task_in_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error }

hdi: task_in_intr: error=0x10 { SectorIdNotFound }, LBAsect=366089224, high=21, low=13767688, sector=366089224

```

hdi is one of the harddisk, which is in the raid0. What can it possible be? Is it trying determining the partition on that drive? Because the harddisk is in raid, and it should use the drive as a single drive. By the way. When linux has booted up, it runs like a charm, and reads the raid device very well. Its just that it is sooo slow booting up, while searching hdi every time.

----------

## fvant

your hdi disk may be in serious trouble i suggest you emerge the smartmontools to read out the drive's status.

----------

## Terrax

 *fvant wrote:*   

> your hdi disk may be in serious trouble i suggest you emerge the smartmontools to read out the drive's status.

 

I got this status from hdi:

terrax terrax # smartctl -H /dev/hdi

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> smartctl version 5.33 [x86_64-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-4 Bruce Allen
> 
> Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/
> ...

 

I would be surprissed, if the disk is broken, because its only two weekds old. The problem started, when I made som of my partitions on the raid, from ntfs to ext3.

[/quote]

----------

## Po0ky

try turning off dma for this drive

----------

## Terrax

 *Po0ky wrote:*   

> try turning off dma for this drive

 

Its s SATA disk. Does SATA support dma?

----------

## Po0ky

I dont know for sure, but dmesg | grep -i dma gives

```
ata1: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x1F0 ctl 0x3F6 bmdma 0x3800 irq 14

ata1: dev 0 ATA, max UDMA7, 156301488 sectors: lba48

ata1: dev 0 configured for UDMA/133

```

So I guess it has..  :Smile: 

----------

## Terrax

 *Po0ky wrote:*   

> I dont know for sure, but dmesg | grep -i dma gives
> 
> ```
> ata1: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x1F0 ctl 0x3F6 bmdma 0x3800 irq 14
> 
> ...

 

It doesnt gives me anything. But I wondered about something else.

Shouldn't my sata disks be displayed with sda instead of hdi? And keep in mind that it is two sata disks which is configured via dmraid. And the devicename is /dev/mapper/nvidia_eaibbhgb. And the partitions on that raid is working very well. Thats why I dont understand the hdi fail in boot :S

----------

## adaptr

 *Terrax wrote:*   

>  *Po0ky wrote:*   try turning off dma for this drive 
> 
> Its s SATA disk. Does SATA support dma?

 

Not only does it support it - it has to, to even be called SATA.

Note that disabling DMA on any member drive of a RAID-0  array will completely and utterly negate any performance wins the RAID array might have gotten you...

Because of this, I would investigate further as to why this happens; how old it is is irrelevant, even a brand-new drive can be faulty.

Now would be a very good time to replace it, before you have any data on it you might like to keep.

(Not that you would keep important data on a RAID-0 stripe, now would you? )

And in light of your "new" info:

Stop guessing, start providing - please list:

- exact make & model of the drive(s) - best given by 

```
hdparm -i /dev/blah
```

 (or sdparm, for sata drives)

- same for the SATA interface, and how you're trying to access it (yes, some are accessed as IDE drives)

- every relevant line from dmesg you have not shown us yet (if you don't know what's relevant, then everything is.)

----------

## Terrax

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> terrax etc # hdparm -i /dev/hdi
> 
> /dev/hdi:
> ...

 

There is no other useful info in dmesg. This is the only, but just repeatted many times.

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> hdi: task_in_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error }
> 
> hdi: task_in_intr: error=0x10 { SectorIdNotFound }, LBAsect=366089348, high=21, low=13767812, sector=366089348
> ...

 

I use a initrd image to see my disks in boot time, with a program called hdparm. I followed a guide in wiki gentoo.

My raid device, is nforce3 software driver. When I first got it to work right. I had 3 ntfs partitions on the raid0. Now I changed partition 2 and 3 to ext3, so I could read/write. My partition 1 is windows xp. I had the windows xp to mount the ext3 partitions. Works very well.

The only problem is the hdi bootup error.

----------

## Terrax

Ok I got another queation... There is such a hard time getting raid0 to work properly.

Will I lose alot of speed making my raid0 to two normal sata disks? Is it something you would suggests?

----------

## adaptr

 *Quote:*   

> There is no other useful info in dmesg

 

Not to put a bee in your bonnet, but you don't know that - or you could have solved it yourself.

Please post the entire relevant portion of dmesg, i.e. everything to do with either IDE or hdi: detection, driver loading, initialisiation, the works.

As to your latest question: no, not if you configure the partitions right.

If you put often-accessed partitions together with less-often-used ones, and spread those over both drives, performance will be more than adequate.

Oh and a lot less dangerous, too.

Apart from all that, using the fake-RAID functionality across OSes can be... challenging, and also quite dangerous, since the drivers are never quite the same.

I wouldn't do it, for either OS.

If you want to use it anyway, I suggest you figure out how to install WinDOS onto a WinRAID config - it can be done, if you have enough knowledge of Windows.

Better to go with all-software RAID than trust to the whims of a faulty chipset manufacturer.

(No, I am not saying nVidia makes faulty chipsets; what I am saying is that anybody who makes these fake-RAID "implementations" in their system hardware is propagating the same faulty setups and assumptions.)

----------

## Terrax

I got alittle further:

I compared the two raid disks. And I saw that the hdi does have MultSect=off and hdk doesnt. How can that be?

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> terrax terrax # hdparm -i /dev/hdk
> 
> /dev/hdk:
> ...

 

----------

## adaptr

I have no idea, but it would be a fair guess that the drive itself, or the kernel, has disabled it when those errors start cropping up during boot.

You can easily re-enable them, of course, and then run hdparm to see what gives.

By the way, where is the logical drive the RAID creates ?

Is it an md-type device, or a separate hd* device ?

I also have my doubts about both of them showing UDMA2 as the maximum transfer mode - for an UDMA100 / ATA-100 drive that should be Ultra-ATA 100, or ATA-5, at least.

All of which could be the drives (or the controller) downgrading to prevent your system from going belly-up completely - remember those nice, fuzzy warning I gave you earlier ?

Please heed them.

----------

## Terrax

adaptr:

You say I should install windows into a winRAID config? What do you mean by that? I dont understand  :Smile:  I have already windows installed on the first partition on the raid. And it works flawless with the raid device.

Sry for my noobiness. But how do I give my whole dmesg output? Whe I type dmesg, I cant see the top of the output. And If I run dmesg | grep ide, only the error, you already have seen is showing.

----------

## Terrax

 *adaptr wrote:*   

> I have no idea, but it would be a fair guess that the drive itself, or the kernel, has disabled it when those errors start cropping up during boot.
> 
> You can easily re-enable them, of course, and then run hdparm to see what gives.
> 
> By the way, where is the logical drive the RAID creates ?
> ...

 

I used dmraid to find the raid devices. They were not found automatically. The logically drive is /dev/mapper/nvidia_eaibbhgb

----------

## adaptr

You do know how to scroll through a console screen, I hope ?

Regardless, you can obviously save the output of dmesg anywhere you like (which is exactly what Gentoo does, by the way):

```
dmesg > ~/dmesg.txt
```

Then use any editor you like to read it.

What I mean by a WinRAID is to use Windows to create a dynamic disk (only possible if it is still empty!) and then create a striped volume.

You'll have to leave a few megs alone at the start for the OS to load, since it can't boot from a striped volume.

Yes, it's a lot of bother, but in my opinion still safer than trusting your OS to a fake-RAID setup.

----------

## Terrax

Here you are  :Smile: 

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> iveReady SeekComplete Error }
> 
> hdi: task_in_intr: error=0x10 { SectorIdNotFound }, LBAsect=366089352, high=21, low=13767816, sector=366089352
> ...

----------

## Terrax

Hmm, the livecd is booting up with no errors. And its finding the raid arrays.

But on the livecd the name of the two sata disk isnt hdi and hdk. Its sda and sdb. Is it there the problem lies?

----------

## Terrax

Okay I found out myself what was wrong. 

It was a bad nvidia driver, which were installed in kernel. I used before the nvidia-ide driver under ATA etc. devices. You had to use the nvidia driver under SCSI devices. Now it is working. And the two drives is now named sda and sdb.

----------

