| 1 |
On Tuesday 27 October 2015 12:04:46 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 26.10.2015 um 15:47 schrieb Peter Humphrey: |
| 3 |
> > I keep the portage tree under /usr-bits. |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > # dmesg | grep sdb3 |
| 6 |
> > [ 1.753508] sdb: sdb1 sdb2 sdb3 sdb4 < sdb5 sdb6 sdb7 sdb8 sdb9 > |
| 7 |
> > [ 4.833460] EXT4-fs (sdb3): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. |
| 8 |
> > Opts: (null) |
| 9 |
> > [ 107.205918] EXT4-fs (sdb3): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. |
| 10 |
> > Opts: (null) |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > You can see the successful mount at 4.8 s; the entry at 107 s is me |
| 13 |
> > mounting it again manually. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > I've rewritten the partition label, and I've run a smartctl test which |
| 16 |
> > reported no faults found. I've also just reduced the speed of the chipset, |
| 17 |
> > which has three settings: good performance, better performance and turbo. |
| 18 |
> > It adopts the turbo setting by default and I've now set it to "better". |
| 19 |
> > It's too early yet to see if that will help. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> interesting ... |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> What init-system? openrc or systemd? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Openrc. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> No trace of the actual unmount in any logs? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Not that I can find, no. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> Maybe also look/grep for the LABEL of the fs. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Nope, nor that. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> Maybe test if using the device-name itself ( /dev/sdb3 ) or the UUID in |
| 36 |
> fstab changes the behavior. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
I'll try reverting to /dev/sdb3 and see if that helps. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
> I use UUIDs here without problems (with systemd). |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
The only thing I use UUIDs for here is in mdadm.conf to get the LVs started |
| 43 |
reliably for the main system*. Those live in partitions /dev/sd[ab][5789]. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Three more things: I've had the cover off and checked the seating of the SATA |
| 46 |
cables; while the lid was off I watched the MB LEDs during startup, which |
| 47 |
seemed okay; and today the kernel was upgraded from 4.0.5 to 4.0.9; that may |
| 48 |
help too. (Hm ... too many changes at once.) |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
* Now that I think of it, one of the LVs came up as inactive the other day, |
| 51 |
and nothing I could think of would activate it (consulting man mdadm of |
| 52 |
course). In the end I had to reboot. This machine has shown some bizarre |
| 53 |
behaviour over the last few months. Something is definitely wrong; I just can't |
| 54 |
figure out what it is. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
-- |
| 57 |
Rgds |
| 58 |
Peter |
Archives