*BSD News Article 3589


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!mips!mips!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!torn!cunews!revcan!sidus!zone4!andrew
From: andrew@zone4.ocunix.on.ca (Andrew Low)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 2nd drive file ... (Actually wd ESDI problems)
Message-ID: <92081228768@zone4.ocunix.on.ca>
Date: 13 Aug 92 03:20:05 GMT
References: <165f2uINN6an@disaster.Germany.EU.net> <tih.713450893@barsoom> <193@asgard.mlb.dmt.csiro.au>
Organization: Zone4
Lines: 33

In article <193@asgard.mlb.dmt.csiro.au> 
mjj@mlb.dmt.csiro.au (Murray Jensen) writes:
>partition C *contains* partitions A, B, E, F, G, H *and* the bad144 area,
>none of which should overlap if they exist.

Well, I don't get it because you go to some trouble to explain that the
bad144 area is contained within the C partition - then..

>		  size	offset	cylinders
>	A:	 10360	 80640	 288- 324
>	B:	 30800	 91000   325- 434
>	C:	205240	 80640	 288-1020
>	D:	285880	     0	   0-1020
>	E:	 80080	   560	   2- 287
>	H:	163800	121800	 435-1019

80640 + 205240 = 285880 (which is the size of the D partition, no?)

Thus it seems to me that this disktab entry doesn't leave any space
for the bad144 sector markings.  My *guess* at the 5 cylinder number is
that 386BSD will try to re-map sectors from that 5 cylinders of free
sectors onto the bad sectors, this allows for 'perfect' media..

Maybe this is in the FAQ, if so please ignore this.  If not, can someone
add something to the FAQ about how the bad sector mapping is handled,
how your disktab entry should look when its done (with some attention
given to the fact that IDE drives should not use bad sector mapping and
how this is done)?

Thanks (especially to the creators of 386bsd!)
+/+\+/+\+/+chew carefully/+\+/+\+/+\+/+\+/+\+/+\+/+\+/+\+/+\+/+\+/+\+/+\+/+\+/+
Roo [andrew@zone4.ocunix.on.ca] m a c h i n e l o v e h a t e f e a r v o i d .
               "dreams are all that separate us from the machines"