Disk Geometry Errors

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I used Ghost 9 to clone a 60 GB failing hard drive to a new 60 GB hard
drive. Ghost now can not see the hard drive. Everything else is
running fine. Here is my problem that Symantec can't help with.

After running PowerQuest PartitionInfo I get errors. I don't know if
the old hard drive had them or if I created them durring the
transfer. Ghost could see my old hard drive though.

How can I repair the Disk Geometry without loosing my data? Here is
what PowerQuest PartitionInfo is telling me.

PowerQuest PartitionInfo 8.0 -- Windows NT/2000 Version
Date Generated: 03/09/05 11:52:52
Copyright (c)1994-2002, PowerQuest Corporation
Permission is granted for this utility to be freely copied so long
as it is not modified in any way. All other rights are reserved.

PowerQuest, makers of PartitionMagic(r), Drive Image(tm), and
DriveCopy(tm), can be reached at:
Voice: 801-437-8900
Fax: 801-226-8941
Web site: http://www.powerquest.com/support/
E-mail: magic@powerquest.com

General System Information:
Total Physical Memory (bytes): 1,610,072,064
Used Physical Memory: (bytes): 483,172,352
Maximum Page File Size: (bytes): 3,634,782,208
Current Page File Size: (bytes): 524,382,208



===========================================================================================================
Disk Geometry Information for Disk 1: 7475 Cylinders, 255 Heads,
63 Sectors/Track
System PartSect # Boot BCyl Head Sect FS ECyl Head
Sect StartSect NumSects
===========================================================================================================
0 0 80 0 1 1 07 1023 254
63 63 120,101,877
Info: End C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
Actual values are:
0 0 80 0 1 1 07 7475 254 63 63
120101877
Error #109: Partition ends after end of disk.
ucEndCylinder (7475) must be less than 7475.



===========================================================================================================
Partition Information for Disk 1: 58,635.7 Megabytes
Volume PartType Status Size MB PartSect #
StartSect TotalSects
===========================================================================================================
C: NTFS Pri,Boot 58,643.5 0 0
63 120,101,877


===========================================================================================================
Boot Record for drive C: (Drive: 1, Starting sector: 63, Type:
NTFS)
===========================================================================================================
1. Jump: EB 52 90
2. OEM Name: NTFS
3. Bytes per Sector: 512
4. Sectors per Cluster: 8
5. Reserved Sectors: 0
6. Number of FATs: 0
7. Root Dir Entries: 0
8. Total Sectors: 0
9. Media Descriptor: 0xF8
10. Sectors per FAT: 0
11. Sectors per Track: 63 (0x3F)
12. Number of Heads: 255 (0xFF)
13. Hidden Sectors: 63 (0x3F)
14. Total Sectors (>32MB): 0 (0x0)
15. Unused: 0x80008000
16. Total NTFS Sectors: 120101876
17. MFT Start Cluster: 4
18. MFT Mirror Start Clust: 7325636
19. Clusters per FRS: 246
20. Clusters per Index Blk: 1
21. Serial Number: 0x3CF05A34F059F51C
22. Checksum: 0 (0x0)
23. Boot Signature: 0xAA55


PLEASE HELP

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

En 422f3d7b$1_4@alt.athenanews.com, BobL va escriure:
============================================================================
===============================
> Disk Geometry Information for Disk 1: 7475 Cylinders, 255 Heads,
> 63 Sectors/Track

So BIOS reports 7475 cylinders (or at least Partition Magic interprets it
this way).

> 0 0 80 0/1/1 07 1023/254/63 63 120,101,877
> Info: End C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
> Actual values are:
> 0 0 80 0/1/1 07 7475/254/63 63 120101877

Let's do some maths:
120,101,877 + 63 (starting) = 120,101,940 (= ending sector, 1-based)
120,101,940 / 63 = 1,906,380 (= ending track, 1-based), no remainder
1,906,380 / 255 = 7476 (= ending cylinder, 1-based)

So the partition has been set up as if the disk is 7476 cylinders long. The
mismatch is what is causing you the messages.

> Error #109: Partition ends after end of disk.
> ucEndCylinder (7475) must be less than 7475.

This message should be read "strictly less than".


First, check what is saying the disk vendor. I shall assume it is 7475, but
perhaps it is 7476 (and the BIOS has been set up incorrectly, or whatever
reason leads PM to be misled. BTW, stealing the last cylinder could be a
good way to hide a virus...)

Then, your problem is that the partition should be shrinked by one cylinder.
The usual tool to do that is Partition Magic, but I understand it will
refuse to do it (among others, because it is unable to find the backup copy
of the boot record, which is stored in the last sector of the partition,
which sector is now unreachable.

I am not aware of anything else that could be affected (assuming of course
no data are stored there, but your disk is not over 88% full, is it?), so
theorically shrinking the partition is as easy as changing the parameters in
the boot record, and copying the new boot record to the end of the disk.
However I never did that (on NTFS). Perhaps Svend Olaf could help you there
(http://www.partitionsupport.com/); however using his tools are too
dangerous for me to explain you how to use them ;-), so I defer to him,
hoping he is not too busy.


Just a stupid question: which version of Ghost did you use?
I would understand what happens to you, if you tried with a 4.x version
(which IIRC was unable to interpret the NTFS version, so would have done a
raw sector copy) along with having the new disk being one cylinder smaller
than the old one.
But nobody copies NTFS partitions with Ghost 4.x in 2005... :^)


Antoine

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Antoine,

Thanks for your imput. I do have to admit I barely understand what is
going on. I used Ghost 9.0. I am trying to contact Olaf to see if he
has the tools to help me. It would be nice if I could just change the
partition by one cylinder. My hard drive is only 30% full, luckily.
I hope that Svend is not too busy to help me. Thanks again.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

None of it really makes sense to me, I just want to get my drive fixed
and figure out how I got it so messed up in the first place.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

The source disk is still available, but the information is missing the
last 3 weeks of work. I suppose that I can back up my data then
restore after redoing the drive. I was hoping there was an easier
way.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Antoine Leca" <root@localhost.invalid> wrote in message news:42301599$0$30327$626a14ce@news.free.fr
> En 422f3d7b$1_4@alt.athenanews.com, BobL va escriure:
> ===========================================================================================================
> > Disk Geometry Information for Disk 1:

> 7475 Cylinders, 255 Heads,

An invalid combination for cylinders and heads.

> > 63 Sectors/Track
>
> So BIOS reports 7475 cylinders (or at least Partition Magic interprets it
> this way).

Either that or it is using the invalid data from the Int13-AH=48h call,
(which probably does to the same thing):
(
by using words:
04h DWORD number of physical cylinders on drive
08h DWORD number of physical heads on drive
0Ch DWORD number of physical sectors per track
)
a forbidden call for CHS geometry (for drives over 8GB)
that all these data mangling cowboys appear to be using.
And contrary to what it says, it aren't even the 'physical' numbers
(P-CHS) but the logical ones (L-CHS) (input side of Bios Int13 call).

>
> > 0 0 80 0/1/1 07 1023/254/63 63 120,101,877
> > Info: End C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
> > Actual values are:
> > 0 0 80 0/1/1 07 7475/254/63 63 120101877
>
> Let's do some maths:
> 120,101,877 + 63 (starting) = 120,101,940 (= ending sector, 1-based)
> 120,101,940 / 63 = 1,906,380 (= ending track, 1-based), no remainder
> 1,906,380 / 255 = 7476 (= ending cylinder, 1-based)
>
> So the partition has been set up as if the disk is 7476 cylinders long.

> The mismatch is what is causing you the messages.

Yes, but that is not the problem.
How about the partition type 0, doesn't that bother you at all?

>
> > Error #109: Partition ends after end of disk.
> > ucEndCylinder (7475) must be less than 7475.
>
> This message should be read "strictly less than".

Whatever.
Point is that 7476*255*63*512 is "after end of disk"
if the disk is physically smaller than that as suggested
by the opening line. 120101877 sectors however, is a
perfectly valid number for a 60GB drive so I'm inclined
to say that the "Disk Geometry Information " info is false.

>
>
> First, check what is saying the disk vendor.

Tough luck.
Diskdrive vendors do not specify L-CHS, only default P-CHS.

> I shall assume it is 7475, but perhaps it is 7476
> (and the BIOS has been set up incorrectly, or whatever
> reason leads PM to be misled.

> BTW, stealing the last cylinder could be a good way to hide a virus...)

Not if that space doesn't physically exist. And for whether it is inside
or outside the partition, what difference does it make when you need to
directly address the physical blocks, since it is supposed to be "hidden"?

>
> Then, your problem is that the partition should be shrinked by one cylinder.
> The usual tool to do that is Partition Magic, but I understand it will
> refuse to do it (among others, because it is unable to find the backup copy
> of the boot record, which is stored in the last sector of the partition,

> which sector is now unreachable.

Huh?

>
> I am not aware of anything else that could be affected (assuming of course
> no data are stored there, but your disk is not over 88% full, is it?), so
> theorically shrinking the partition is as easy as changing the parameters in
> the boot record, and copying the new boot record to the end of the disk.
> However I never did that (on NTFS). Perhaps Svend Olaf could help you there
> (http://www.partitionsupport.com/); however using his tools are too
> dangerous for me to explain you how to use them ;-), so I defer to him,
> hoping he is not too busy.
>
>
> Just a stupid question: which version of Ghost did you use?
> I would understand what happens to you, if you tried with a 4.x version
> (which IIRC was unable to interpret the NTFS version, so would have done a
> raw sector copy) along with having the new disk being one cylinder smaller
> than the old one.
> But nobody copies NTFS partitions with Ghost 4.x in 2005... :^)
>
>
> Antoine

 

[joeP]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Hi,

"Antoine Leca" <root@localhost.invalid> wrote in message
news:42301599$0$30327$626a14ce@news.free.fr...
> First, check what is saying the disk vendor. I shall assume it is 7475,
but
> perhaps it is 7476 (and the BIOS has been set up incorrectly, or whatever
> reason leads PM to be misled. BTW, stealing the last cylinder could be a
> good way to hide a virus...)

It's the NT/2000 version of partinfo, it doesn't use the BIOS. If the OS is
actually XP, XP could be 'hiding' the last cylinder. Possible the DOS
version of partinfo does show an extra cylinder and that the disk was
partitioned using a tool using the BIOS.

>
> Then, your problem is that the partition should be shrinked by one
cylinder.
> The usual tool to do that is Partition Magic, but I understand it will
> refuse to do it

You can do it with the DOS version, start it with the switch /ipe

>
> I am not aware of anything else that could be affected (assuming of course
> no data are stored there, but your disk is not over 88% full, is it?), so
> theorically shrinking the partition is as easy as changing the parameters
in
> the boot record

Yes, the partition table and the partition's boot record.

> , and copying the new boot record to the end of the disk.

That isn't all you'd need to change though. For one, the $Bitmap would be
covering clusters that you'd have cut off and that are outside your
partition. Possibly chkdsk can correct that.

> However I never did that (on NTFS).

I did enlarge NTFS partitions that way. Make sure upon next boot to run
chkdsk. Chkdsk will then mention it is correcting the $Bitmap. After that
all's well.

--
Joep

 

[joeP]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"BobL" <blenz@dupagewater-dot-com.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:4230b916$1_1@alt.athenanews.com...
> None of it really makes sense to me, I just want to get my drive fixed
> and figure out how I got it so messed up in the first place.
>

The hard disk isn't really messed up probably. You can restore the image
again while leaving some free space at the end of the disk. 1 cylinder (=
7.8 Mb) is enough.

If you copied disk to disk, and the source disk is still available, resize
the partition down on the destination by one cylinder (assuming that's still
possible like with the older DriveImage versions).

--
Joep

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message news:39bitfF60veciU1@individual.net
> "Antoine Leca" <root@localhost.invalid> wrote in message news:42301599$0$30327$626a14ce@news.free.fr
> > En 422f3d7b$1_4@alt.athenanews.com, BobL va escriure:
> > ===========================================================================================================
[...]
> > > 0 0 80 0/1/1 07 1023/254/63 63 120,101,877
> > > Info: End C,H,S values were large drive placeholders.
> > > Actual values are:
> > > 0 0 80 0/1/1 07 7475/254/63 63 120101877
> >
> > Let's do some maths:
> > 120,101,877 + 63 (starting) = 120,101,940 (= ending sector, 1-based)
> > 120,101,940 / 63 = 1,906,380 (= ending track, 1-based), no remainder
> > 1,906,380 / 255 = 7476 (= ending cylinder, 1-based)
> >
> > So the partition has been set up as if the disk is 7476 cylinders long.
>
> > The mismatch is what is causing you the messages.
>
> Yes, but that is not the problem.
> How about the partition type 0, doesn't that bother you at all?

Oops, (got too familiar with Svends display format which is only slightly
different). It's 07 (installable File System) as it is supposed to be.
Odd that "Ghost now can not see the hard drive" when it obviously *has*
to see it to be able to notice that something is slightly wrong with it.

>
> >
> > > Error #109: Partition ends after end of disk.
> > > ucEndCylinder (7475) must be less than 7475.
> >
> > This message should be read "strictly less than".
>
> Whatever.
> Point is that 7476*255*63*512 is "after end of disk"
> if the disk is physically smaller than that, as suggested
> by the opening line. 120101877 sectors however, is a
> perfectly valid number for a 60GB drive so I'm inclined
> to say that the "Disk Geometry Information " info is false.
>
> >
> >
> > First, check what is saying the disk vendor.
>
> Tough luck.
> Diskdrive vendors do not specify L-CHS, only default P-CHS.
>
> > I shall assume it is 7475, but perhaps it is 7476
> > (and the BIOS has been set up incorrectly, or whatever
> > reason leads PM to be misled.
>
> > BTW, stealing the last cylinder could be a good way to hide a virus...)
>
> Not if that space doesn't physically exist. And for whether it is inside
> or outside the partition, what difference does it make when you need to
> directly address the physical blocks, since it is supposed to be "hidden"?
>
[snip]

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

En 39bitfF60veciU1@individual.net, Folkert Rienstra va escriure:
> "Antoine Leca" <root@localhost.invalid> wrote in message
> news:42301599$0$30327$626a14ce@news.free.fr
============================================================================
===============================
>>> Disk Geometry Information for Disk 1:
>
>> 7475 Cylinders, 255 Heads,
>
> An invalid combination for cylinders and heads.

Invalid to whom?

Many tools around still use this combination, even when everybody and his
dog are well aware CHS informations are obsolete and unused.
One of this tool is diskmgmt.msc, BTW (it rounds partitions to cylinder
boundaries; _logical_ cylinders).

Also, I am expecting problems to occur when this number of cylinders will
reach the 65,536 limit... that is 502 GiB, 540 GB... so next year I believe;
stay tuned ;-)


>> First, check what is saying the disk vendor.
>
> Tough luck.
> Diskdrive vendors do not specify L-CHS, only default P-CHS.

In fact I did not think about checking the 7476 vs. 7475 numbers, but rather
the sector numbers. Anyway, the result is that 7476 turns into 119150
16-track cylinders (with a small round up), and this numbers shows quite
regularly for 60.0 GB disks; while at the same time 7475 means 11913x such
cylinders, and this does not appear common.
So 7476 should be the "correct" figure; and something "stole" the last
cylinder.


>> BTW, stealing the last cylinder could be a good way to hide a
>> virus...)
>
> Not if that space doesn't physically exist.

But if it does...

> And for whether it is inside or outside the partition, what
> difference does it make when you need to directly address
> the physical blocks, since it is supposed to be "hidden"?

Well, because some tools happen to be cautious and only allow you to access
the sectors outside the partition scheme (or the geometry, or "the geometry
as they understand it is").

I understand the last cylinder was not hidden when it was partitionned in
the first place (or at least that the partionning tool used then saw it
visible); now things are different, the last cylinder is _now_ hidden.


>> because it is unable to find the backup copy
>> of the boot record, which is stored in the last sector of the
>> partition, which sector is now unreachable.
>
> Huh?

I guess Ghost (when it did the clone) saw the last cylinder; so it wrote the
boot record mirror in its correct place.

Now it is hidden, so it says the disk is incorrect and refuses to process.
This makes sense to me.


Bob, what is saying CHKDSK from within Windows?


Antoine

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Please setup your newsclient properly.

"Antoine Leca" <root@localhost.invalid> wrote in message news:4235b039$0$28591$636a15ce@news.free.fr
> En 39bitfF60veciU1@individual.net, Folkert Rienstra va escriure:
> > "Antoine Leca" <root@localhost.invalid> wrote in message news:42301599$0$30327$626a14ce@news.free.fr
> ===========================================================================================================
> > > > Disk Geometry Information for Disk 1:
> >
> > > 7475 Cylinders, 255 Heads,
> >
> > An invalid combination for cylinders and heads.
>
> Invalid to whom?

The BIOS and other OS disk addressing calls.

7475 cylinders and 16 heads is valid, for the IDE interface side.
1024 cylinders and 255 heads is valid for the program interface side of BIOS.
7475 Cylinders, 255 Heads is not valid for IDE interface or Bios interface.

>
> Many tools around still use this combination,

Yes, many of the data mangling cowboys still use it.

> even when everybody and his dog are well aware CHS informations are obsolete and unused.

Nonsense, unless you call anything of just a few years back obsolete, like Windows 9x/ME.

> One of this tools is diskmgmt.msc, BTW (it rounds partitions to cylinder boundaries;
> _logical_ cylinders).

But it isn't actually using CHS in disk addressing calls to do it, it is only using H and S
to check whether the LBA addresses are a full set of cylinders with no H and S leftovers.
If there are then they are stripped and the LBA is recalculated.

What one can ask oneself is:
where does it grab those CHS values from in the first place since they aren't necessarily
in actual use.

>
> Also, I am expecting problems to occur when this number of cylinders will
> reach the 65,536 limit...

What 65,536 limit. There is no such 65,536 limit.
The limit is what you impose on it in your own re-calculations.
Even Int13-AH=48h uses Dwords for CHS.

> that is 502 GiB, 540 GB... so next year I believe; stay tuned ;-)

Don't hold your breath.

>
>
> > > First, check what is saying the disk vendor.
> >
> > Tough luck.
> > Diskdrive vendors do not specify L-CHS, only default P-CHS.
>
> In fact I did not think about checking the 7476 vs. 7475 numbers, but rather
> the sector numbers. Anyway, the result is that 7476 turns into 119150
> 16-track cylinders (with a small round up), and this numbers shows quite
> regularly for 60.0 GB disks; while at the same time 7475 means 11913x such
> cylinders, and this does not appear common.

I checked IBM and Maxtor which had the same numbers: 120,103,200 sectors
Seagate and WD were a little bit smaller: 117,231,408 sectors

> So 7476 should be the "correct" figure; and something "stole" the last
> cylinder.
>
>
> > > BTW, stealing the last cylinder could be a good way to hide a virus...)
> >
> > Not if that space doesn't physically exist.
>
> But if it does...
>
> > And for whether it is inside or outside the partition, what
> > difference does it make when you need to directly address
> > the physical blocks, since it is supposed to be "hidden"?
>
> Well, because some tools happen to be cautious and only allow you to access
> the sectors outside the partition scheme (or the geometry, or "the geometry
> as they understand it is").

Sorry, can't make any sense out of that.

>
> I understand the last cylinder was not hidden when it was partitioned in
> the first place (or at least that the partionning tool used then saw it
> visible); now things are different, the last cylinder is _now_ hidden.

Not necessarily but if that is what the app thinks that it is, because
of it's own stupidity ... , well, maybe. That is just speculation.

>
>
> > > because it is unable to find the backup copy of the boot record,
> > > which is stored in the last sector of the partition, which sector
> > > is now unreachable.
> >
> > Huh?
>
> I guess Ghost (when it did the clone) saw the last cylinder; so it wrote the
> boot record mirror in its correct place.
>
> Now it is hidden, so it says the disk is incorrect and refuses to process.

Does it? His words were: can't see.

> This makes sense to me.

Only if that was what he meant when he said "can't see".

>
>
> Bob, what is saying CHKDSK from within Windows?
>
>
> Antoine