[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: CLOSE SESSION failed with SK=5h/INVALID FIELD IN CDB: not harmless?

Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>> When I read the block from /dev/sr0 what I get back is all-zeroes. The
>> corresponding block on the udf image is full of non-zero data.
>>  the next 2048-byte block following 8585216 on /dev/sr1 is non-zero.
> Ouchers.
> That looks much like a failure of transport or
> drive. 
> It happens far before any Close Session failure
> could spoil it directly, and it is hard to
> imagine how such a final problem should leave
> 8 MB unaltered and spoil a single block of 2048
> bytes.
> If possible try to find out whether there are
> more differing blocks in the image.
> It is a bit astounding that a first altered
> block at that address disturbed the UDF tree
> without any error message.
> Did you check your kernel logs already ?
Sorry, I should have mentioned that. Yes, indeed I did check the kernel
logs and they were clean! This is the only thing in there:

[1379091.856282] UDF-fs INFO UDF: Mounting volume 'Old C', timestamp
2009/11/24 22:02 (11e0)

So it certainly sees /some/ of the UDF info. Gack!

I looked to see if I could find any messages that may have occurred
during writing also but no such luck, there are none to be found. FWIW
the drive is connected via USB:

[1215397.604019] usb 1-2: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and
address 5
[1215397.737008] usb 1-2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice
[1215397.737626] scsi8 : SCSI emulation for USB Mass Storage devices
[1215397.737706] usb-storage: device found at 5
[1215397.737709] usb-storage: waiting for device to settle before scanning
[1215402.736214] usb-storage: device scan complete
[1215404.170839] scsi 8:0:0:0: CD-ROM            HL-DT-ST BD-RE 
GGW-H20N  XJ03 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0
[1215404.190820] sr1: scsi3-mmc drive: 40x/40x writer dvd-ram cd/rw
xa/form2 cdda tray
[1215404.191254] sr 8:0:0:0: Attached scsi CD-ROM sr1
[1215404.192384] sr 8:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg4 type 5

> Well, it would be expensive to make lots of
> experiments and to compare the outcome.
> But currently i see not much other opportunity
> to gain wisdom.
> My own experience with BD-R and BD-RE tells me
> that they are quite reliable. At least compared
> with early DVDs.
> So if you need that backup then first try
> single layer media. It should be not too
> cumbersome to split 37 GB onto 22.5 GB media.
> (I could provide my splitting backup program
>  scdbackup, though.)
> Any problem with the bus should show up with
> BD-RE as much as with BD-R or BD-R DL.
I have one BD-RE media right now also so I'll give that a try, just to
see if I can get some other mistakes. I'll certainly be upset if it's
the drive--I've used it hardly at all. It seems that this drive
(Buffalo) is an LG OEM and LG has new firmware revisions but Buffalo is
not releasing any updates. Bogus!

Jens B. Jorgensen

Reply to: