My flash card slot in the laptop is (per lspci): 03:01.2 SD Host controller: Ricoh Co Ltd R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter (rev 21)
I insert into it a SanDisk 16GB Extreme SD card. This card is not marked as a secure card. At least, it does not say so on the card.
It gets automounted read only as:
/dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/jd/3D90-BEAB type fuseblk (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,allow_other,blksize=4096)
# umount -f /dev/mmcblk0p1
# /sbin/mount.exfat -o rw /dev/mmcblk0p1 /mmcblk0p1 FUSE exfat 1.0.1 WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
So, what is causing it to be mountable read-only, and not get mounted read/write?
PS: If I insert the card into a USB flash card adapter, I can then mount it RW.
my first guess:
write protect switch (tab):
http://static.commentcamarche.net/en.kioskea.net/faq/images/0-hXBUyBSB-t555-...
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 12:15 PM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
My flash card slot in the laptop is (per lspci): 03:01.2 SD Host controller: Ricoh Co Ltd R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter (rev 21)
I insert into it a SanDisk 16GB Extreme SD card. This card is not marked as a secure card. At least, it does not say so on the card.
It gets automounted read only as:
/dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/jd/3D90-BEAB type fuseblk (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,allow_other,blksize=4096)
# umount -f /dev/mmcblk0p1
# /sbin/mount.exfat -o rw /dev/mmcblk0p1 /mmcblk0p1 FUSE exfat 1.0.1 WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
So, what is causing it to be mountable read-only, and not get mounted read/write?
PS: If I insert the card into a USB flash card adapter, I can then mount it RW.
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 08/25/2014 01:49 PM, Tod Merley wrote:
my first guess write protect switch (tab):
http://static.commentcamarche.net/en.kioskea.net/faq/images/0-hXBUyBSB-t555-...
I tried with the switch in the up and the down position and tried to mount. In both cases I am getting:
WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
well does seem to be a common thread:
https://www.google.com/search?q=sd+card+will+mount+only+read+only+fedora+20&...
- would love to see what we do find.
Could you post the mount part of your dmesg (in a terminal "dmesg | tail -n 30" and look for a segment similar to the last of this which shows first a USB flash drive then an SD card using a USB card reader:
[ 2324.410311] usb-storage 4-4.2:1.0: USB Mass Storage device detected [ 2324.410521] scsi10 : usb-storage 4-4.2:1.0 [ 2325.477674] scsi 10:0:0:0: Direct-Access Kingston DataTraveler 3.0 PMAP PQ: 0 ANSI: 6 [ 2325.478327] sd 10:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg5 type 0 [ 2326.057398] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] 61440000 512-byte logical blocks: (31.4 GB/29.2 GiB) [ 2326.063433] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Write Protect is off [ 2326.063445] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Mode Sense: 23 00 00 00 [ 2326.069441] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] No Caching mode page found [ 2326.069453] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2326.105490] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] No Caching mode page found [ 2326.105501] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2326.163558] sde: sde1 sde2 sde3 sde4 < sde5 > [ 2326.197620] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] No Caching mode page found [ 2326.197630] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2326.197639] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Attached SCSI removable disk [ 2330.331430] EXT4-fs (sde2): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 2330.342313] EXT4-fs (sde5): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 2682.408285] sde: detected capacity change from 31457280000 to 0 [ 2687.133326] usb 4-4.2: USB disconnect, device number 6 [42624.370736] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] 61407232 512-byte logical blocks: (31.4 GB/29.2 GiB) [42624.390790] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] No Caching mode page found [42624.390806] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] Assuming drive cache: write through [42624.430844] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] No Caching mode page found [42624.430858] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] Assuming drive cache: write through [42624.440864] sdd: sdd1
Also it would be interesting to see what happens in a terminal tab where a "journalctl -f" has been opened and is following what happens as the card is mounted.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:41 PM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/25/2014 01:49 PM, Tod Merley wrote:
my first guess write protect switch (tab): http://static.commentcamarche.
net/en.kioskea.net/faq/images/0-hXBUyBSB-t555-1122-callout-s-.png
I tried with the switch in the up and the down position and tried to mount. In both cases I am getting:
WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 08/25/2014 05:58 PM, Tod Merley wrote:
well does seem to be a common thread:
https://www.google.com/search?q=sd+card+will+mount+only+read+only+fedora+20&...
- would love to see what we do find.
Could you post the mount part of your dmesg (in a terminal "dmesg | tail -n 30" and look for a segment similar to the last of this which shows first a USB flash drive then an SD card using a USB card reader:
[ 2324.410311] usb-storage 4-4.2:1.0: USB Mass Storage device detected [ 2324.410521] scsi10 : usb-storage 4-4.2:1.0 [ 2325.477674] scsi 10:0:0:0: Direct-Access Kingston DataTraveler 3.0 PMAP PQ: 0 ANSI: 6 [ 2325.478327] sd 10:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg5 type 0 [ 2326.057398] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] 61440000 512-byte logical blocks: (31.4 GB/29.2 GiB) [ 2326.063433] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Write Protect is off [ 2326.063445] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Mode Sense: 23 00 00 00 [ 2326.069441] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] No Caching mode page found [ 2326.069453] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2326.105490] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] No Caching mode page found [ 2326.105501] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2326.163558] sde: sde1 sde2 sde3 sde4 < sde5 > [ 2326.197620] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] No Caching mode page found [ 2326.197630] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2326.197639] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Attached SCSI removable disk [ 2330.331430] EXT4-fs (sde2): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 2330.342313] EXT4-fs (sde5): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 2682.408285] sde: detected capacity change from 31457280000 to 0 [ 2687.133326] usb 4-4.2: USB disconnect, device number 6 [42624.370736] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] 61407232 512-byte logical blocks: (31.4 GB/29.2 GiB) [42624.390790] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] No Caching mode page found [42624.390806] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] Assuming drive cache: write through [42624.430844] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] No Caching mode page found [42624.430858] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] Assuming drive cache: write through [42624.440864] sdd: sdd1
Also it would be interesting to see what happens in a terminal tab where a "journalctl -f" has been opened and is following what happens as the card is mounted.
Here is what happens:
[20673.251583] mmc0: card e624 removed [20689.837805] mmc0: new high speed SDHC card at address e624 [20689.839545] mmcblk0: mmc0:e624 SU16G 14.8 GiB (ro) [20689.870081] mmcblk0: p1
However, dmesg does not show any FS type info, but I had formatted as exfat, and is automounted upon insertion:
# mount ... /dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/jd/3D90-BEAB type fuseblk (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,allow_other,blksize=4096)
The search link I provided probably has the story. This may well be a bug.
The "follow" of the journalctl I suggested would likely tell much more.
Searching the journal with such as " journalctl | grep e624 " or perhaps " journalctl | grep mmc0 " might turn up additional hints (or other hints from the dmesg or search results).
Also a Google search on your very specific card and F-20, include your card reader, look for "keys" along the way.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 6:55 PM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/25/2014 05:58 PM, Tod Merley wrote:
well does seem to be a common thread:
https://www.google.com/search?q=sd+card+will+mount+only+ read+only+fedora+20&oq=sd+card+will+mount+only+read+ only+fedora+20&aqs=chrome..69i57.16787j0j7&sourceid= chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8
- would love to see what we do find.
Could you post the mount part of your dmesg (in a terminal "dmesg | tail -n 30" and look for a segment similar to the last of this which shows first a USB flash drive then an SD card using a USB card reader:
[ 2324.410311] usb-storage 4-4.2:1.0: USB Mass Storage device detected [ 2324.410521] scsi10 : usb-storage 4-4.2:1.0 [ 2325.477674] scsi 10:0:0:0: Direct-Access Kingston DataTraveler 3.0 PMAP PQ: 0 ANSI: 6 [ 2325.478327] sd 10:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg5 type 0 [ 2326.057398] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] 61440000 512-byte logical blocks: (31.4 GB/29.2 GiB) [ 2326.063433] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Write Protect is off [ 2326.063445] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Mode Sense: 23 00 00 00 [ 2326.069441] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] No Caching mode page found [ 2326.069453] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2326.105490] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] No Caching mode page found [ 2326.105501] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2326.163558] sde: sde1 sde2 sde3 sde4 < sde5 > [ 2326.197620] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] No Caching mode page found [ 2326.197630] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2326.197639] sd 10:0:0:0: [sde] Attached SCSI removable disk [ 2330.331430] EXT4-fs (sde2): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 2330.342313] EXT4-fs (sde5): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 2682.408285] sde: detected capacity change from 31457280000 to 0 [ 2687.133326] usb 4-4.2: USB disconnect, device number 6 [42624.370736] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] 61407232 512-byte logical blocks: (31.4 GB/29.2 GiB) [42624.390790] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] No Caching mode page found [42624.390806] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] Assuming drive cache: write through [42624.430844] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] No Caching mode page found [42624.430858] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdd] Assuming drive cache: write through [42624.440864] sdd: sdd1
Also it would be interesting to see what happens in a terminal tab where a "journalctl -f" has been opened and is following what happens as the card is mounted.
Here is what happens:
[20673.251583] mmc0: card e624 removed [20689.837805] mmc0: new high speed SDHC card at address e624 [20689.839545] mmcblk0: mmc0:e624 SU16G 14.8 GiB (ro) [20689.870081] mmcblk0: p1
However, dmesg does not show any FS type info, but I had formatted as exfat, and is automounted upon insertion:
# mount ...
/dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/jd/3D90-BEAB type fuseblk (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,allow_other,blksize=4096)
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 08/25/2014 05:58 PM, Tod Merley wrote:
well does seem to be a common thread:
https://www.google.com/search?q=sd+card+will+mount+only+read+only+fedora+20&...
So, one of the links claims that if the sdcard contains exfat and was not umounted cleanly, it will mount read only - thus fsck is called for.
So, I unmounted it and ran: # fsck.exfat /dev/mmcblk0p1 exfatfsck 1.0.1 Checking file system on /dev/mmcblk0p1. File system version 1.0 Sector size 512 bytes Cluster size 32 KB Volume size 15 GB Used space 3759 MB Available space 11 GB Totally 124 directories and 1235 files. File system checking finished. No errors found.
# /sbin/mount.exfat -o rw /dev/mmcblk0p1 /mmcblk0p1 FUSE exfat 1.0.1 WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
The tape trick mentioned did not work.
The solder trick is not an option for me.
Tod Merley wrote:
my first guess write protect switch (tab)
jd1008:
I tried with the switch in the up and the down position and tried to mount. In both cases I am getting:
WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
Could be what senses the switch position in the reader isn't working. Are other cards mountable as writable, in the same reader?
On SD cards, it's not really a switch, there's no electronics behind it, it's just an object that's felt, or looked through, in the reader. Rather like the record protect holes in old fashioned cassette tapes.
fwiw
Googling " 03:01.2 SD Host controller: Ricoh Co Ltd R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter (rev 21) "
nets a whole bunch of linux problems threads
Another silly thought. Dust-Off the card reader bay. If the switch position detection is optically based perhaps dust or dirt could become a problem.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Tim ignored_mailbox@yahoo.com.au wrote:
Tod Merley wrote:
my first guess write protect switch (tab)
jd1008:
I tried with the switch in the up and the down position and tried to mount. In both cases I am getting:
WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
Could be what senses the switch position in the reader isn't working. Are other cards mountable as writable, in the same reader?
On SD cards, it's not really a switch, there's no electronics behind it, it's just an object that's felt, or looked through, in the reader. Rather like the record protect holes in old fashioned cassette tapes.
-- tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.15.10-200.fc20.i686 #1 SMP Thu Aug 14 16:12:39 UTC 2014 i686
All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point trying to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the public lists.
George Orwell's '1984' was supposed to be a warning against tyranny, not a set of instructions for supposedly democratic governments.
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 08/26/2014 04:19 AM, Tod Merley wrote:
fwiw
Googling " 03:01.2 SD Host controller: Ricoh Co Ltd R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter (rev 21) "
nets a whole bunch of linux problems threads
Another silly thought. Dust-Off the card reader bay. If the switch position detection is optically based perhaps dust or dirt could become a problem.
Good idea! Now that you mention it, I think that the 6 pack of pressurized air cans I bought from costco at a great bargain a couple of months ago will come in handy :)
Hi again jd1008!
A couple of things:
1. Be careful with the Dust-Off - especially with a new can. Good to get the tube so that it can be horizontal during the operation and do a short "liquid clearing" spray before you go inside the bay. The liquid form is hard on plastic I do believe. Be careful not to "tilt" a new can.
2. If you run lspci as root you will have access to the extended information (no "Capabilities: <access denied>"). But be careful if you are ever tempted to use the "-x" option this way. Some segments of memory even accessed can change things in some boxes although it is rare anymore.
3. The first part of the journalctl -f results seem to be talking about problems with updates. You might try an "sudo yum update" in a terminal and watch what is going on. An update problem could "cause" a port problem by a bug fix not getting to you - and - the particular device in your box seems to be well talked about in the linux problem sphere.
I will try to get some time to look at the rest of the "fail" problems in the journalctl -f results later today or tomorrow.
Have a lot of fun!!!
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:16 AM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/26/2014 04:19 AM, Tod Merley wrote:
fwiw
Googling " 03:01.2 SD Host controller: Ricoh Co Ltd R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter (rev 21) "
nets a whole bunch of linux problems threads
Another silly thought. Dust-Off the card reader bay. If the switch position detection is optically based perhaps dust or dirt could become a problem.
Good idea! Now that you mention it, I think that the 6 pack of pressurized air cans I bought from costco at a great bargain a couple of months ago will come in handy :)
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 08/25/2014 10:45 PM, Tim wrote:
Tod Merley wrote:
my first guess write protect switch (tab)
Could be what senses the switch position in the reader isn't working. Are other cards mountable as writable, in the same reader?
On SD cards, it's not really a switch, there's no electronics behind it, it's just an object that's felt, or looked through, in the reader. Rather like the record protect holes in old fashioned cassette tapes.
It is a slider about 2mm or 2.5mm long and almost 1mm thick. When in the up position (towards the corner which goes into the controller) it is supposed to tell the controller write lock off (disabled). But it is not working in my machine because some bloggers say that the slider needs to protrude a little farther away from the body of the sd card in order for the sensor to turn off (the on-by-default) write lock.
On Tue, 2014-08-26 at 12:10 -0600, jd1008 wrote:
It is a slider about 2mm or 2.5mm long and almost 1mm thick. When in the up position (towards the corner which goes into the controller) it is supposed to tell the controller write lock off (disabled). But it is not working in my machine because some bloggers say that the slider needs to protrude a little farther away from the body of the sd card in order for the sensor to turn off (the on-by-default) write lock.
I can't remember if you've already made a comment about trying this; but have you tried putting a sticker around the card?
Four observations:
1. The fsck.exfat command worked. So obviously the mkfs command and kernel aren't seeing the wrong state of the card's physical lock switch. It sounds like a weird bug that it then can't be mounted. Maybe try an explicit mount -t without -o rw. I'd think if it's a bug it'd have been found about an hour later though, pretty significant bug if it's a bug.
2.
Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001
SDHC cards are supposed to be formatted FAT32. And SDXC is supposed to be formatted exFAT. That's per the SD Card specs anyway, which is how any camera supporting these types of cards should work.
3.
Last, and actually most important, practically obsoleting the above two observations: this card is being used in a camera? The camera must be used to format it. That's what the camera manufacturer and the SD card manufacturer will tell you. The interoperability is *so bad* with SD cards, that they will both tell you that corruption and even camera malfunction is expected if you don't format the card in-camera.
Further, it's well understood by pros and the amateur (the classic connotation of the word implies someone more serious about their interest than even a pro) that the camera image delete option shouldn't be used. Take your shots, fill up the card or get to a good break point to swap cards. When sucking the images off the card with a computer, suck all of them off, back them up, then go through and throw away the junk photos you don't want. Reformat the card in the camera.
4.
Best quote about SD Cards ever: "You aren't storing your data, you're storing a probabilistic approximation of your data." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPEzLNh5YIo Quote is somewhere around 3m30s; including the point that flash memory is unreliable, and lots of other cool observations. I don't know why these things are called secure digital (SD) after watching this.
Chris Murphy
On 08/26/2014 09:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Four observations:
- The fsck.exfat command worked. So obviously the mkfs command and kernel aren't seeing the wrong state of the card's physical lock switch. It sounds like a weird bug that it then can't be mounted. Maybe try an explicit mount -t without -o rw. I'd think if it's a bug it'd have been found about an hour later though, pretty significant bug if it's a bug.
# mount -t exfat /dev/mmcblk0p1 /mmcblk0p1 FUSE exfat 1.0.1 WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001
SDHC cards are supposed to be formatted FAT32. And SDXC is supposed to be formatted exFAT. That's per the SD Card specs anyway, which is how any camera supporting these types of cards should work.
I had deliberately formatted it as exfat in windows because I was loaning it to a friend so he could fill it for me with files on his apple laptop, with such incredibly long file names, that vfat could not accommodate them, and that caused some files in which the first n bytes of the name were the same, so file 2 for example over-wrote file1. Thus formatting it as exfat solved that problem and I was able to receive those files.
Last, and actually most important, practically obsoleting the above two observations: this card is being used in a camera? The camera must be used to format it. That's what the camera manufacturer and the SD card manufacturer will tell you. The interoperability is *so bad* with SD cards, that they will both tell you that corruption and even camera malfunction is expected if you don't format the card in-camera.
Further, it's well understood by pros and the amateur (the classic connotation of the word implies someone more serious about their interest than even a pro) that the camera image delete option shouldn't be used. Take your shots, fill up the card or get to a good break point to swap cards. When sucking the images off the card with a computer, suck all of them off, back them up, then go through and throw away the junk photos you don't want. Reformat the card in the camera.
Nop! It has never seen a camera :)
Best quote about SD Cards ever: "You aren't storing your data, you're storing a probabilistic approximation of your data." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPEzLNh5YIo Quote is somewhere around 3m30s; including the point that flash memory is unreliable, and lots of other cool observations. I don't know why these things are called secure digital (SD) after watching this.
Good observation. They say that nand flash has a longer life span as it can handle higher number of writes per block before reaching 50/50 probability :) As far as "secure" , I can say with a great degree of certitude that when it comes to computer data, nothing is secure nor private if you are on the internet, regardless of which OS you use. Even if you use cyphered email (between individuals that share each other's publik keys). In fact, publikly available sypher systems are so readily breakable by the nsa, it's a joke to believe that "encyphering data with freely available cypher systems and then xmitting them over the internet" is secure. After all, if it were not so, these cypher systems would not be freely publicly available.
Allegedly, on or about 26 August 2014, Chris Murphy sent:
Last, and actually most important, practically obsoleting the above two observations: this card is being used in a camera? The camera must be used to format it. That's what the camera manufacturer and the SD card manufacturer will tell you. The interoperability is *so bad* with SD cards, that they will both tell you that corruption and even camera malfunction is expected if you don't format the card in-camera.
Further, it's well understood by pros and the amateur (the classic connotation of the word implies someone more serious about their interest than even a pro) that the camera image delete option shouldn't be used.
I've come across that. But, said as it's best to only write to a card on only one device, and for that device to do *all* the reading, writing, deleting, and formatting. Though, in general, only delete individual files if you're really short on space. Otherwise, leave things there until you've done with the card.
Here, the distinction between pro and amateur was whether it's a paying career, or not. Pro doesn't necessarily mean expert, or even any good. ;-\
On 08/26/2014 06:05 PM, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2014-08-26 at 12:10 -0600, jd1008 wrote:
It is a slider about 2mm or 2.5mm long and almost 1mm thick. When in the up position (towards the corner which goes into the controller) it is supposed to tell the controller write lock off (disabled). But it is not working in my machine because some bloggers say that the slider needs to protrude a little farther away from the body of the sd card in order for the sensor to turn off (the on-by-default) write lock.
I can't remember if you've already made a comment about trying this; but have you tried putting a sticker around the card?
I tried 1 layer of tape over the lock slider. More than 1 layer of tape makes the card too hard to insert into the slot. It really is a very tight does not seem to provide much play root.
Allegedly, on or about 26 August 2014, jd1008 sent:
I tried 1 layer of tape over the lock slider. More than 1 layer of tape makes the card too hard to insert into the slot. It really is a very tight does not seem to provide much play root.
Is the sensor optical rather than physical? If so, you could try black texta over the thing.
Have you tried other brands of cards?
Can you try a warranty claim on the device that won't handle the card?
On 08/27/2014 05:21 AM, Tim wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 26 August 2014, jd1008 sent:
I tried 1 layer of tape over the lock slider. More than 1 layer of tape makes the card too hard to insert into the slot. It really is a very tight does not seem to provide much play root.
Is the sensor optical rather than physical? If so, you could try black texta over the thing.
Have you tried other brands of cards?
Can you try a warranty claim on the device that won't handle the card?
It is as I explained in a previous post - about 2mm long, and about 1 or 0.75mm thick (the thickness of the card. The card was bought from Costco and I am not sure it carries a warranty. I have had it for about a year. Many other blogs including those that found the physical problem to be in the laptop's reader slot, say they fixed it by doing some solder job on the slot's writelock sensor mechanism so that writelock is always disabled, and you can format the card. I am not so keen on doing that. As far as trying other brands, not have not. Until some real gold rains on my backyard :) I will not be buying another sd card. -----------
A suggestion by Chris to reformat as ext4 and retry: Well, to reformat it as ext4, I would still need the writelock disabled. So, no way I can reformat it as ext4 either.
Allegedly, on or about 27 August 2014, jd1008 sent:
The card was bought from Costco and I am not sure it carries a warranty. I have had it for about a year.
There probably is one, even if they don't mention it (one of those consumer protection laws). Proving it, is the hard part. I keep receipts, but after a few weeks, it's hard to find the one that you want (for small items... I file receipts in the manuals that come with larger items, those are much harder to lose).
Many other blogs including those that found the physical problem to be in the laptop's reader slot, say they fixed it by doing some solder job on the slot's writelock sensor mechanism so that writelock is always disabled, and you can format the card. I am not so keen on doing that.
I can understand that. I still wonder if the sensor is mechanical, or optical. I've had optical sensors that fail when ambient light is too much for them (just try servicing VCRs under bright light, and you have to cover optical sensors up to get the deck to do anything, likewise for people trying to use some VCRs in daylight).
On 08/27/2014 07:10 PM, Tim wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 27 August 2014, jd1008 sent:
The card was bought from Costco and I am not sure it carries a warranty. I have had it for about a year.
I can understand that. I still wonder if the sensor is mechanical, or optical. I've had optical sensors that fail when ambient light is too much for them (just try servicing VCRs under bright light, and you have to cover optical sensors up to get the deck to do anything, likewise for people trying to use some VCRs in daylight).
It is electro-mechanical. No opticals involved at all.
Allegedly, on or about 27 August 2014, jd1008 sent:
It is electro-mechanical. No opticals involved at all.
Then try putting a tiny dot of superglue put on top of the slider, itself, just to make that part of the card a bit bigger. Poke a toothpick into the glue, and use that to put a dot on the slider.
That's the simplest way I can think of to make the switch more prominent to the sensor, without making the whole card too big to fit.
On 08/28/2014 06:32 AM, Tim wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 27 August 2014, jd1008 sent:
It is electro-mechanical. No opticals involved at all.
Then try putting a tiny dot of superglue put on top of the slider, itself, just to make that part of the card a bit bigger. Poke a toothpick into the glue, and use that to put a dot on the slider.
That's the simplest way I can think of to make the switch more prominent to the sensor, without making the whole card too big to fit.
Well, I decided to wait for the 64gbyte xtreme card to soon go on sale at costco, and will see if it has the same problem. If it does, then I will return it and try the glue trick. If the 64gbyte is mountable rw, I will donate my 16gbyte to a friend :)
Thanx,
JD
On 08/26/14 03:15, jd1008 wrote:
My flash card slot in the laptop is (per lspci): 03:01.2 SD Host controller: Ricoh Co Ltd R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter (rev 21)
I insert into it a SanDisk 16GB Extreme SD card. This card is not marked as a secure card. At least, it does not say so on the card.
It gets automounted read only as:
/dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/jd/3D90-BEAB type fuseblk (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,allow_other,blksize=4096)
# umount -f /dev/mmcblk0p1
# /sbin/mount.exfat -o rw /dev/mmcblk0p1 /mmcblk0p1 FUSE exfat 1.0.1 WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
So, what is causing it to be mountable read-only, and not get mounted read/write?
Did you format your card using the RPMfusion exfat-utils or did you do it on Windows? Whichever way you did it, you can try the other way. If that doesn't work, you may want to ask on the RPMFusion list and/or file a bugzilla there.
On 08/25/2014 08:40 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/26/14 03:15, jd1008 wrote:
My flash card slot in the laptop is (per lspci): 03:01.2 SD Host controller: Ricoh Co Ltd R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter (rev 21)
I insert into it a SanDisk 16GB Extreme SD card. This card is not marked as a secure card. At least, it does not say so on the card.
It gets automounted read only as:
/dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/jd/3D90-BEAB type fuseblk (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,allow_other,blksize=4096)
# umount -f /dev/mmcblk0p1
# /sbin/mount.exfat -o rw /dev/mmcblk0p1 /mmcblk0p1 FUSE exfat 1.0.1 WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
So, what is causing it to be mountable read-only, and not get mounted read/write?
Did you format your card using the RPMfusion exfat-utils or did you do it on Windows? Whichever way you did it, you can try the other way. If that doesn't work, you may want to ask on the RPMFusion list and/or file a bugzilla there.
If I recall correctly, I had indeed originally formatted it as exfat on windows. But after that I was found the rpmfusion exfat-utils and installed them on my fc20.
On 08/26/14 10:58, jd1008 wrote:
If I recall correctly, I had indeed originally formatted it as exfat on windows. But after that I was found the rpmfusion exfat-utils and installed them on my fc20.
I don't quite understand....
Is the card currently formatted by Windows? If so, could you try formatting via the rpmfusion utils? Or, if you reformatted with the rpmfusion utils, could you format again under windows or the device you're using it in.
Oh, and you've used it in Windows OK?
If it is OK in Windows and/or your device then rpmfusion bugzilla may be in order.
On 08/25/2014 09:07 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/26/14 10:58, jd1008 wrote:
If I recall correctly, I had indeed originally formatted it as exfat on windows. But after that I was found the rpmfusion exfat-utils and installed them on my fc20.
I don't quite understand....
Is the card currently formatted by Windows? If so, could you try formatting via the rpmfusion utils? Or, if you reformatted with the rpmfusion utils, could you format again under windows or the device you're using it in.
Oh, and you've used it in Windows OK?
If it is OK in Windows and/or your device then rpmfusion bugzilla may be in order.
I had no problem using it on Linux after I had formatted it under windows as exfat. However, at tat time, I did not have a laptop with a working sdcard reader built-in. So I had used a USB sdcard reader/writer adapter, and Linux had no problems with it (i.e. was mounted RW). Later, I replaced my old laptop with a slightly newer one (Dell Latitude E6500) and I inserted the sd card in the dell laptop and always got automounted read only. As I had also mentioned, fc20 has no problem automounting it RW if I use the USB sd card adapter.
On 08/26/14 11:16, jd1008 wrote:
I had no problem using it on Linux after I had formatted it under windows as exfat. However, at tat time, I did not have a laptop with a working sdcard reader built-in. So I had used a USB sdcard reader/writer adapter, and Linux had no problems with it (i.e. was mounted RW). Later, I replaced my old laptop with a slightly newer one (Dell Latitude E6500) and I inserted the sd card in the dell laptop and always got automounted read only. As I had also mentioned, fc20 has no problem automounting it RW if I use the USB sd card adapter.
OK, so you're basically saying it is formatted under windows and works when connected to a USB sdcard adapter.
It doesn't work with the built-in card reader of the Dell Latitude E6500.
I think the card reader should be on the usb bus. So, what does it show as in lsusb?
I still would try formatting it with the rpmfusion utils and see if that changes anything. If that doesn't make a difference I'd file an rpmfusion bugzilla.
On 08/25/2014 09:29 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/26/14 11:16, jd1008 wrote:
I had no problem using it on Linux after I had formatted it under windows as exfat. However, at tat time, I did not have a laptop with a working sdcard reader built-in. So I had used a USB sdcard reader/writer adapter, and Linux had no problems with it (i.e. was mounted RW). Later, I replaced my old laptop with a slightly newer one (Dell Latitude E6500) and I inserted the sd card in the dell laptop and always got automounted read only. As I had also mentioned, fc20 has no problem automounting it RW if I use the USB sd card adapter.
OK, so you're basically saying it is formatted under windows and works when connected to a USB sdcard adapter.
It doesn't work with the built-in card reader of the Dell Latitude E6500.
I think the card reader should be on the usb bus. So, what does it show as in lsusb?
I still would try formatting it with the rpmfusion utils and see if that changes anything. If that doesn't make a difference I'd file an rpmfusion bugzilla.
Apparently, it is not on the usb bus
$ lsusb Bus 002 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0002 Linux Foundation 2.0 root hub Bus 008 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 007 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 006 Device 002: ID 062a:3286 Creative Labs Nano Receiver [Sandstrom Laser Mouse SMWLL11] Bus 006 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 001 Device 004: ID 0c45:63f1 Microdia Integrated Webcam Bus 001 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0002 Linux Foundation 2.0 root hub Bus 005 Device 002: ID 0a5c:5800 Broadcom Corp. BCM5880 Secure Applications Processor Bus 005 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 004 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 003 Device 004: ID 413c:8158 Dell Computer Corp. Integrated Touchpad / Trackstick Bus 003 Device 003: ID 413c:8157 Dell Computer Corp. Integrated Keyboard Bus 003 Device 002: ID 0a5c:4500 Broadcom Corp. BCM2046B1 USB 2.0 Hub (part of BCM2046 Bluetooth) Bus 003 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub
My card is a Samsung 32 EVO Micro SD HC I held in an SD adapter and used and formatted by my Nikon camera.
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ journalctl -f -- Logs begin at Mon 2014-08-25 06:16:28 PDT. -- Aug 25 20:28:07 localhost.localdomain dhclient[1015]: ... ... ... [starting line just before SD card plugged in] ... Aug 25 20:23:00 localhost.localdomain gnome-session[1411]: Window manager warning: Log level 8: meta_window_focus: assertion '!window->overr... failed Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: p1 Aug 25 20:24:28 localhost.localdomain kernel: SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts Aug 25 20:24:28 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Mounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 at /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME on behalf of uid 1000 Aug 25 20:25:08 localhost.localdomain NetworkManager[640]: <warn> nl_recvmsgs() error: (-33) Dump inconsistency detected, interrupted ... [ending one line after SD card plugged in] ... ... [unmount remove re-insert] ... Aug 25 20:42:54 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Cleaning up mount point /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME (device 179:1 is not mounted) Aug 25 20:42:54 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Unmounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 on behalf of uid 1000 Aug 25 20:43:32 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: card 0001 removed Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: p1 Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Mounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 at /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME on behalf of uid 1000
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ dmesg ... ... [ 202.037022] mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch [ 202.134193] mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 [ 202.160009] mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB [ 202.163517] mmcblk0: p1 [ 203.258077] SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ mount ... ... /dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME type vfat (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1000,fmask=0022,dmask=0077,codepage=437,iocharset=ascii,shortname=mixed,showexec,utf8,flush,errors=remount-ro,uhelper=udisks2)
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 7:58 PM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/25/2014 08:40 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/26/14 03:15, jd1008 wrote:
My flash card slot in the laptop is (per lspci): 03:01.2 SD Host controller: Ricoh Co Ltd R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter (rev 21)
I insert into it a SanDisk 16GB Extreme SD card. This card is not marked as a secure card. At least, it does not say so on the card.
It gets automounted read only as:
/dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/jd/3D90-BEAB type fuseblk (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,allow_other,blksize=4096)
# umount -f /dev/mmcblk0p1
# /sbin/mount.exfat -o rw /dev/mmcblk0p1 /mmcblk0p1 FUSE exfat 1.0.1 WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
So, what is causing it to be mountable read-only, and not get mounted read/write?
Did you format your card using the RPMfusion exfat-utils or did you do it on Windows? Whichever way you did it, you can try the other way. If that doesn't work, you may want to ask on the RPMFusion list and/or file a bugzilla there.
If I recall correctly, I had indeed originally formatted it as exfat on
windows. But after that I was found the rpmfusion exfat-utils and installed them on my fc20.
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 08/26/14 11:54, Tod Merley wrote:
/dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME type vfat (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1000,fmask=0022,dmask=0077,codepage=437,iocharset=ascii,shortname=mixed,showexec,utf8,flush,errors=remount-ro,uhelper=udisks2)
Your card is formatted as vfat. So, there may be an apples/oranges comparison there.....
Ed I simply wanted to show the process. I know - I knew - I thought it was obvious - indeed it is.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com wrote:
On 08/26/14 11:54, Tod Merley wrote:
/dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME type vfat
(rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1000,fmask=0022,dmask=0077,codepage=437,iocharset=ascii,shortname=mixed,showexec,utf8,flush,errors=remount-ro,uhelper=udisks2)
Your card is formatted as vfat. So, there may be an apples/oranges comparison there.....
-- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
jd1008 wrote:
" Later, I replaced my old laptop with a slightly newer one (Dell Latitude E6500) and I inserted the sd card in the dell laptop and always got automounted read only. As I had also mentioned, fc20 has no problem automounting it RW if I use the USB sd card adapter. "
Well if you can sort out the specifics of your adapter (lspci -v -v) and which driver (lsmod) is being used you are probably pretty close to having enough info to either find a real solution by a Google search or to file a very precise bug report.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Tod Merley todbot88@gmail.com wrote:
Ed I simply wanted to show the process. I know - I knew - I thought it was obvious - indeed it is.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Ed Greshko ed.greshko@greshko.com wrote:
On 08/26/14 11:54, Tod Merley wrote:
/dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME type vfat
(rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1000,fmask=0022,dmask=0077,codepage=437,iocharset=ascii,shortname=mixed,showexec,utf8,flush,errors=remount-ro,uhelper=udisks2)
Your card is formatted as vfat. So, there may be an apples/oranges comparison there.....
-- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 08/25/2014 10:26 PM, Tod Merley wrote:
jd1008 wrote:
" Later, I replaced my old laptop with a slightly newer one (Dell Latitude E6500) and I inserted the sd card in the dell laptop and always got automounted read only. As I had also mentioned, fc20 has no problem automounting it RW if I use the USB sd card adapter. "
Well if you can sort out the specifics of your adapter (lspci -v -v) and which driver (lsmod) is being used you are probably pretty close to having enough info to either find a real solution by a Google search or to file a very precise bug report.
Thanx Tod! Ed Greshko was right to say the sd controller is on the usb bus,but I did not use the -v -v option :) So: 03:01.2 SD Host controller: Ricoh Co Ltd R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter (rev 21) (prog-if 01) Subsystem: Dell Device 024f Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium
TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
Latency: 64, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes Interrupt: pin C routed to IRQ 18 Region 0: Memory at f1bff600 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=256] Capabilities: <access denied> Kernel driver in use: sdhci-pci Kernel modules: sdhci_pci
However, in one of the links sent by another respondent, many bloggers asserted that using a tape on the sd card's write-lock slider, they were able to mount rw. However, putting tape on that slider (ostensibly to make it protrude more away from the body of the sdcard), which would make the card reader's mechanism for sensing the write lock in OFF position to work, DID NOT WORK for me because then I was unable to slide the card into the very tight slot.
I did add the word "exfat" to my original search line and results are different but none seem on the mark.
Search term " sd exfat card will mount only read only fedora 20 "
Perhaps time to start looking at how other machines see the card - and how other cards work formatted as you like in your affected Fedora machine. A theme I seem to see is that not all cards work with all readers in all computers running all OS's. Oh - how could this be?!?
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Tod Merley todbot88@gmail.com wrote:
My card is a Samsung 32 EVO Micro SD HC I held in an SD adapter and used and formatted by my Nikon camera.
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ journalctl -f -- Logs begin at Mon 2014-08-25 06:16:28 PDT. -- Aug 25 20:28:07 localhost.localdomain dhclient[1015]: ... ... ... [starting line just before SD card plugged in] ... Aug 25 20:23:00 localhost.localdomain gnome-session[1411]: Window manager warning: Log level 8: meta_window_focus: assertion '!window->overr... failed Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: p1 Aug 25 20:24:28 localhost.localdomain kernel: SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts Aug 25 20:24:28 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Mounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 at /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME on behalf of uid 1000 Aug 25 20:25:08 localhost.localdomain NetworkManager[640]: <warn> nl_recvmsgs() error: (-33) Dump inconsistency detected, interrupted ... [ending one line after SD card plugged in] ... ... [unmount remove re-insert] ... Aug 25 20:42:54 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Cleaning up mount point /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME (device 179:1 is not mounted) Aug 25 20:42:54 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Unmounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 on behalf of uid 1000 Aug 25 20:43:32 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: card 0001 removed Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: p1 Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Mounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 at /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME on behalf of uid 1000
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ dmesg ... ... [ 202.037022] mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch [ 202.134193] mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 [ 202.160009] mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB [ 202.163517] mmcblk0: p1 [ 203.258077] SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ mount ... ... /dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME type vfat (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1000,fmask=0022,dmask=0077,codepage=437,iocharset=ascii,shortname=mixed,showexec,utf8,flush,errors=remount-ro,uhelper=udisks2)
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 7:58 PM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/25/2014 08:40 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 08/26/14 03:15, jd1008 wrote:
My flash card slot in the laptop is (per lspci): 03:01.2 SD Host controller: Ricoh Co Ltd R5C822 SD/SDIO/MMC/MS/MSPro Host Adapter (rev 21)
I insert into it a SanDisk 16GB Extreme SD card. This card is not marked as a secure card. At least, it does not say so on the card.
It gets automounted read only as:
/dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/jd/3D90-BEAB type fuseblk (ro,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,allow_ other,blksize=4096)
# umount -f /dev/mmcblk0p1
# /sbin/mount.exfat -o rw /dev/mmcblk0p1 /mmcblk0p1 FUSE exfat 1.0.1 WARN: `/dev/mmcblk0p1' is write-protected, mounting read-only.
So, what is causing it to be mountable read-only, and not get mounted read/write?
Did you format your card using the RPMfusion exfat-utils or did you do it on Windows? Whichever way you did it, you can try the other way. If that doesn't work, you may want to ask on the RPMFusion list and/or file a bugzilla there.
If I recall correctly, I had indeed originally formatted it as exfat on
windows. But after that I was found the rpmfusion exfat-utils and installed them on my fc20.
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 08/25/2014 09:54 PM, Tod Merley wrote:
My card is a Samsung 32 EVO Micro SD HC I held in an SD adapter and used and formatted by my Nikon camera.
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ journalctl -f -- Logs begin at Mon 2014-08-25 06:16:28 PDT. -- Aug 25 20:28:07 localhost.localdomain dhclient[1015]: ... ... ... [starting line just before SD card plugged in] ... Aug 25 20:23:00 localhost.localdomain gnome-session[1411]: Window manager warning: Log level 8: meta_window_focus: assertion '!window->overr... failed Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: p1 Aug 25 20:24:28 localhost.localdomain kernel: SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts Aug 25 20:24:28 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Mounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 at /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME on behalf of uid 1000 Aug 25 20:25:08 localhost.localdomain NetworkManager[640]: <warn> nl_recvmsgs() error: (-33) Dump inconsistency detected, interrupted ... [ending one line after SD card plugged in] ... ... [unmount remove re-insert] ... Aug 25 20:42:54 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Cleaning up mount point /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME (device 179:1 is not mounted) Aug 25 20:42:54 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Unmounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 on behalf of uid 1000 Aug 25 20:43:32 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: card 0001 removed Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: p1 Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Mounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 at /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME on behalf of uid 1000
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ dmesg ... ... [ 202.037022] mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch [ 202.134193] mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 [ 202.160009] mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB [ 202.163517] mmcblk0: p1 [ 203.258077] SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ mount ... ... /dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME type vfat (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1000,fmask=0022,dmask=0077,codepage=437,iocharset=ascii,shortname=mixed,showexec,utf8,flush,errors=remount-ro,uhelper=udisks2)
On my machine, journalctl -f hangs after the last line:
$ journalctl -f -- Logs begin at Sat 2014-06-07 19:14:31 MDT. -- Aug 26 11:44:20 localhost.localdomain dnf[2094]: Error: Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'updates' from 'https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=updates-released-f20&arc...': Cannot download repomd.xml: Downloading successfull, but checksum doesn't match. Expected: f740c67dbd54f0d63eb4068cc0e83d473fbf1c41c535adba87c54a64ee7 Aug 26 11:44:20 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: dnf-makecache.service: main process exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE Aug 26 11:44:20 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Failed to start dnf makecache. Aug 26 11:44:20 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Unit dnf-makecache.service entered failed state. Aug 26 11:49:11 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Starting Cleanup of Temporary Directories... Aug 26 11:49:13 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Started Cleanup of Temporary Directories. Aug 26 11:50:01 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Starting Session 3 of user root. Aug 26 11:50:01 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Started Session 3 of user root. Aug 26 11:50:01 localhost.localdomain CROND[2126]: (root) CMD (/usr/lib64/sa/sa1 1 1) Aug 26 11:51:57 localhost.localdomain kernel: [63B blob data]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_blob
So you are telling me that inserting he card, mounting the card (auto likely) and unmounting the card make no change?
that is strange
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DNF
let us know how " sudo yum update " pans out.
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:55 AM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/25/2014 09:54 PM, Tod Merley wrote:
My card is a Samsung 32 EVO Micro SD HC I held in an SD adapter and used and formatted by my Nikon camera.
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ journalctl -f -- Logs begin at Mon 2014-08-25 06:16:28 PDT. -- Aug 25 20:28:07 localhost.localdomain dhclient[1015]: ... ... ... [starting line just before SD card plugged in] ... Aug 25 20:23:00 localhost.localdomain gnome-session[1411]: Window manager warning: Log level 8: meta_window_focus: assertion '!window->overr... failed Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB Aug 25 20:24:27 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: p1 Aug 25 20:24:28 localhost.localdomain kernel: SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts Aug 25 20:24:28 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Mounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 at /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME on behalf of uid 1000 Aug 25 20:25:08 localhost.localdomain NetworkManager[640]: <warn> nl_recvmsgs() error: (-33) Dump inconsistency detected, interrupted ... [ending one line after SD card plugged in] ... ... [unmount remove re-insert] ... Aug 25 20:42:54 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Cleaning up mount point /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME (device 179:1 is not mounted) Aug 25 20:42:54 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Unmounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 on behalf of uid 1000 Aug 25 20:43:32 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: card 0001 removed Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: mmcblk0: p1 Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain kernel: SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts Aug 25 20:43:36 localhost.localdomain udisksd[1516]: Mounted /dev/mmcblk0p1 at /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME on behalf of uid 1000
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ dmesg ... ... [ 202.037022] mmc0: cannot verify signal voltage switch [ 202.134193] mmc0: new ultra high speed SDR50 SDHC card at address 0001 [ 202.160009] mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 00000 29.2 GiB [ 202.163517] mmcblk0: p1 [ 203.258077] SELinux: initialized (dev mmcblk0p1, type vfat), uses genfs_contexts
[tmerley@localhost ~]$ mount ... ... /dev/mmcblk0p1 on /run/media/tmerley/NO_NAME type vfat (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1000,fmask=0022, dmask=0077,codepage=437,iocharset=ascii,shortname= mixed,showexec,utf8,flush,errors=remount-ro,uhelper=udisks2)
On my machine, journalctl -f hangs after the last line:
$ journalctl -f -- Logs begin at Sat 2014-06-07 19:14:31 MDT. -- Aug 26 11:44:20 localhost.localdomain dnf[2094]: Error: Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'updates' from 'https://mirrors. fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=updates-released-f20&arch=x86_64': Cannot download repomd.xml: Downloading successfull, but checksum doesn't match. Expected: f740c67dbd54f0d63eb4068cc0e83d473fbf1c41c535adba87c54a64ee7 Aug 26 11:44:20 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: dnf-makecache.service: main process exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE Aug 26 11:44:20 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Failed to start dnf makecache. Aug 26 11:44:20 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Unit dnf-makecache.service entered failed state. Aug 26 11:49:11 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Starting Cleanup of Temporary Directories... Aug 26 11:49:13 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Started Cleanup of Temporary Directories. Aug 26 11:50:01 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Starting Session 3 of user root. Aug 26 11:50:01 localhost.localdomain systemd[1]: Started Session 3 of user root. Aug 26 11:50:01 localhost.localdomain CROND[2126]: (root) CMD (/usr/lib64/sa/sa1 1 1) Aug 26 11:51:57 localhost.localdomain kernel: [63B blob data]
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On Aug 25, 2014, at 1:15 PM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
/dev/mmcblk
What kernel version? There have been a pile of mmc related patches to the kernel the last few months with more on the way. Thing is, mkfs.exfat and your camera can obviously write to the card. So it's not write protected or that wouldn't work. Why it can't be mounted read/write sounds like some obscure exfat bug.
What happens if you format it ext4 or btrfs? Does it mount read/write then?
But no seriously, format it in your camera in the end if you're planning on actually using it with the camera to take photos.
Chris Murphy
On 08/26/2014 09:19 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Aug 25, 2014, at 1:15 PM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
/dev/mmcblk
What kernel version? There have been a pile of mmc related patches to the kernel the last few months with more on the way. Thing is, mkfs.exfat and your camera can obviously write to the card. So it's not write protected or that wouldn't work. Why it can't be mounted read/write sounds like some obscure exfat bug.
What happens if you format it ext4 or btrfs? Does it mount read/write then?
But no seriously, format it in your camera in the end if you're planning on actually using it with the camera to take photos.
Chris Murphy
kernel-3.15.10-200.fc20.x86_64 At this time I am not inclined to back it up to HD and reformat it as ext4 or btrfs. But will do as soon as I have some bandwidth. Thanx Chris!!
On 08/26/2014 09:19 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Aug 25, 2014, at 1:15 PM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
/dev/mmcblk
What kernel version? There have been a pile of mmc related patches to the kernel the last few months with more on the way. Thing is, mkfs.exfat and your camera can obviously write to the card. So it's not write protected or that wouldn't work. Why it can't be mounted read/write sounds like some obscure exfat bug. What happens if you format it ext4 or btrfs? Does it mount read/write then? But no seriously, format it in your camera in the end if you're planning on actually using it with the camera to take photos. Chris Murphy
Hi Chris, I found some cycles to try that out, though I knew full well it would lead nowhere, but still wanted to show you. I backed up the sd card and then inserted it into the usb adapter and reformatted it as ext4 and inserted it into the sdcard slot in the laptop. dmesg shows: [ 2123.164767] sdc: detected capacity change from 15931539456 to 0 [ 2137.362810] mmc0: new high speed SDHC card at address e624 [ 2137.589888] mmcblk0: mmc0:e624 SU16G 14.8 GiB (ro) <<<<<<<< Look at this!!! [ 2137.601275] mmcblk0: p1 [ 2137.918757] EXT4-fs (mmcblk0p1): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null)
On Aug 27, 2014, at 1:00 PM, jd1008 jd1008@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Chris, I found some cycles to try that out, though I knew full well it would lead nowhere, but still wanted to show you. I backed up the sd card and then inserted it into the usb adapter and reformatted it as ext4 and inserted it into the sdcard slot in the laptop. dmesg shows: [ 2123.164767] sdc: detected capacity change from 15931539456 to 0 [ 2137.362810] mmc0: new high speed SDHC card at address e624 [ 2137.589888] mmcblk0: mmc0:e624 SU16G 14.8 GiB (ro) <<<<<<<< Look at this!!! [ 2137.601275] mmcblk0: p1 [ 2137.918757] EXT4-fs (mmcblk0p1): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null)
Ahh I see. Not paying attention, I didn't realize you were formatting it in a USB->SD Card adapter, and then transferring it to the built-in slot in the laptop.
So I'd say it's worth trying a newer kernel, even grabbing a top of the list 3.17rc2 one from koji [1]. Keep the SD Card formatted ext4, insert it, mount it, then 'dmesg > dmesg.txt' and 'lspci -vvnn > lspci.txt' and attach them both to a bugzilla.kernel.org bug report. Let them know what other kernel versions you've tried.
Chris Murphy
[1] You need kernel, kernel-core, and kernel-modules RPMs. Then dnf/yum install *rpm from the same directory.
On 08/27/2014 06:02 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Ahh I see. Not paying attention, I didn't realize you were formatting it in a USB->SD Card adapter, and then transferring it to the built-in slot in the laptop.
So I'd say it's worth trying a newer kernel, even grabbing a top of the list 3.17rc2 one from koji [1]. Keep the SD Card formatted ext4, insert it, mount it, then 'dmesg > dmesg.txt' and 'lspci -vvnn > lspci.txt' and attach them both to a bugzilla.kernel.org bug report. Let them know what other kernel versions you've tried.
Chris Murphy
[1] You need kernel, kernel-core, and kernel-modules RPMs. Then dnf/yum install *rpm from the same directory.
Well, fc21 will soon be out. I do not want to mix and match.
-
Chris Murphy -
Ed Greshko -
JD -
Tim -
Tod Merley