WDC WD30EZRZ-00Z5HB0 Data area offset
August 15th, 2023, 11:28
I received a WD hard drive called Diablo3S, which rotates normally. All firmware modules tested OK, and there was an offset in the user area data area.
The DBR is normal at 2048, now at 2056
and the data offset in the future is even worse. How can I fix it.
I saw a post on the ACE forum regarding the same issue. ACE asked the user to provide the 02 module of the hard drive, and the repaired 02 module was sent to the user to ultimately solve the problem.
I have always believed that the offset was caused by module 148. Perhaps my approach was wrong. Is the correct repair method in module 02?
The original 02 module is attached below.
The DBR is normal at 2048, now at 2056
and the data offset in the future is even worse. How can I fix it.
I saw a post on the ACE forum regarding the same issue. ACE asked the user to provide the 02 module of the hard drive, and the repaired 02 module was sent to the user to ultimately solve the problem.
I have always believed that the offset was caused by module 148. Perhaps my approach was wrong. Is the correct repair method in module 02?
The original 02 module is attached below.
Re: WDC WD30EZRZ-00Z5HB0 Data area offset
August 16th, 2023, 3:34
i would check 148 if it has entries that correlate to the shifts you experience. You will need to identify some more shift points i think.
Re: WDC WD30EZRZ-00Z5HB0 Data area offset
August 16th, 2023, 3:58
I don't think it makes any difference, but just FYI, the drive appears to have been installed in an external enclosure with a 4KB sector size.
Could this drive be one of those which had a jumper for offset-by-one mapping??? This was how WD's older AF models enabled Win XP to maintain physical sector alignment when using LBA 63 (shifted to LBA 64) as the boot sector of the first partition. When you stick such a drive in a 4KB enclosure, the offset would be multiplied by 8.
Could this drive be one of those which had a jumper for offset-by-one mapping??? This was how WD's older AF models enabled Win XP to maintain physical sector alignment when using LBA 63 (shifted to LBA 64) as the boot sector of the first partition. When you stick such a drive in a 4KB enclosure, the offset would be multiplied by 8.
Re: WDC WD30EZRZ-00Z5HB0 Data area offset
August 16th, 2023, 5:32
wanted to edit my prev post, but could not, so:
i would check 148 if it has entries that correlate to the shifts you experience. You will need to identify some more shift points i think.
It's been quite some years since i had such issues with diablo drives, so my memories are pretty faint, it was well before it was common knowledge that 148 stores ranges that cause shifts, so i had to research it. What i recall is that my data might not have been shifted but the head map in DE was shifted relative to the real working values.
It is also possible that entries are missing from 148, let's say, it is more probable than not.
as for the offset jumper: if that was an issue, the offset would be consistent and no problems would arise at all. imo.
pepe
i would check 148 if it has entries that correlate to the shifts you experience. You will need to identify some more shift points i think.
It's been quite some years since i had such issues with diablo drives, so my memories are pretty faint, it was well before it was common knowledge that 148 stores ranges that cause shifts, so i had to research it. What i recall is that my data might not have been shifted but the head map in DE was shifted relative to the real working values.
It is also possible that entries are missing from 148, let's say, it is more probable than not.
as for the offset jumper: if that was an issue, the offset would be consistent and no problems would arise at all. imo.
pepe
Re: WDC WD30EZRZ-00Z5HB0 Data area offset
August 17th, 2023, 11:36
fzabkar wrote:I don't think it makes any difference, but just FYI, the drive appears to have been installed in an external enclosure with a 4KB sector size.
Could this drive be one of those which had a jumper for offset-by-one mapping??? This was how WD's older AF models enabled Win XP to maintain physical sector alignment when using LBA 63 (shifted to LBA 64) as the boot sector of the first partition. When you stick such a drive in a 4KB enclosure, the offset would be multiplied by 8.
He is currently unable to expand the partition normally, and there will be many MFT errors after data analysis, and the data is basically damaged
==========================================================
BootNTFSatLBA=257
BootNTFSatLBA=257
Toseedeletedfiles, use the option 'Showdeleted'!
Checkboot<Base>... Error!
MinorerrorsinBootatLBA=257
Reserved Not Zero
Initialize NTFS variables
MftRecordSize=4096
ClusterSize=4096
IndexRecordSize=4096
DataStart=257
TotalSectors=732558079
MaxSector=732558336
Checkboot<Base>... Error!
MinorerrorsinBootatLBA=257
Reserved Not Zero
Initialize NTFS variables
MftRecordSize=4096
ClusterSize=4096
IndexRecordSize=4096
DataStart=257
TotalSectors=732558079
MaxSector=732558336
LoadMFTmap - Mapfilled
Index has bad MFT records 156425360CloudUI
Index has a bad MFT record 175399 window opening small gift box -3 curved silicone plates. ai
Index has bad MFT records 1028100ba9a859d5d7894755bf0af1
Index has bad MFT record 165119Thumbs.db
Index has bad MFT records 161186 Order Form
Index has a bad MFT record of 21034342 degrees, and its profit is outside the box. jpg
Index has a bad MFT record of 21034042 degrees and its sharp box.jpg
Index has a bad MFT record of 21034253 degrees, which is beneficial for external box.jpg
Index has a bad MFT record of 21034153 degrees and its sharp box.jpg
Index has bad MFT record 1686696B85864171AF
Index has bad MFT record 177582AdobeIllustratorCS5
Index has bad MFT record 177580 Adobe Illustrator CS4 Simplified Chinese Green Edition
Index has bad MFT records 175262 Monthly Summary (August 2017). doc
Index has bad MFT records 163492 miscellaneous
Index has bad MFT record 104847 Shenzhen Office (Bear)
Index has bad MFT record 105097 production
Index has bad MFT records 164916 comes with software
Index has bad MFT record 175138 Design Contract. doc
Index has bad MFT record 209241 Thunderbolt download
Index has bad MFT record 209242 Thunder Cloud Disk
Index has bad MFT record 171493 HaloCloud
Index entry has bad MFT record 165404LaserJet_m1005.exe
Index entry has bad MFT records 165709OJ7110_971-2. exe
Index entry has bad MFT record 167306stylus_photo_r230.exe
Index has bad MFT record 177572Adobe photoshopCS5.3965557328.zip
Index has a bad MFT record of 177577Adobe Illustrator CS4
Index entry has bad MFT record 209667BaiduNetdiskDownload
Index has bad MFT record 171271C5ECB71606CC
Размер карты больше максимально возможного！
Re: WDC WD30EZRZ-00Z5HB0 Data area offset
August 17th, 2023, 11:40
pepe wrote:wanted to edit my prev post, but could not, so:
i would check 148 if it has entries that correlate to the shifts you experience. You will need to identify some more shift points i think.
It's been quite some years since i had such issues with diablo drives, so my memories are pretty faint, it was well before it was common knowledge that 148 stores ranges that cause shifts, so i had to research it. What i recall is that my data might not have been shifted but the head map in DE was shifted relative to the real working values.
It is also possible that entries are missing from 148, let's say, it is more probable than not.
as for the offset jumper: if that was an issue, the offset would be consistent and no problems would arise at all. imo.
pepe
I am attaching the 148 module of my faulty disk. Can you analyze it and find out if there is a problem? Or can it be processed remotely?
Re: WDC WD30EZRZ-00Z5HB0 Data area offset
August 17th, 2023, 12:10
fzabkar wrote:I don't think it makes any difference, but just FYI, the drive appears to have been installed in an external enclosure with a 4KB sector size.
Could this drive be one of those which had a jumper for offset-by-one mapping??? This was how WD's older AF models enabled Win XP to maintain physical sector alignment when using LBA 63 (shifted to LBA 64) as the boot sector of the first partition. When you stick such a drive in a 4KB enclosure, the offset would be multiplied by 8.
Yes, I used 4K mode when creating DE tasks, but when the partition was expanded to the MFT location, there were a lot of errors and almost all the files were damaged and could not be opened
BootNTFSatLBA=257
BootNTFSatLBA=257
Toseedeletedfiles, use the option 'Showdeleted'!
Checkboot<Base>... Error!
MinorerrorsinBootatLBA=257
Reserved Not Zero
Initialize NTFS variables
MftRecordSize=4096
ClusterSize=4096
IndexRecordSize=4096
DataStart=257
TotalSectors=732558079
MaxSector=732558336
Checkboot<Base>... Error!
MinorerrorsinBootatLBA=257
Reserved Not Zero
Initialize NTFS variables
MftRecordSize=4096
ClusterSize=4096
IndexRecordSize=4096
DataStart=257
TotalSectors=732558079
MaxSector=732558336
LoadMFTmap - Mapfilled
Index has bad MFT records 156425360CloudUI
Index has a bad MFT record 175399 window opening small gift box -3 curved silicone plates. ai
Index has bad MFT records 1028100ba9a859d5d7894755bf0af1
Index has bad MFT record 165119Thumbs.db
Index has bad MFT records 161186 Order Form
Index has a bad MFT record of 21034342 degrees, and its profit is outside the box. jpg
Index has a bad MFT record of 21034042 degrees and its sharp box.jpg
Index has a bad MFT record of 21034253 degrees, which is beneficial for external box.jpg
Index has a bad MFT record of 21034153 degrees and its sharp box.jpg
Index has bad MFT record 1686696B85864171AF
Index has bad MFT record 177582AdobeIllustratorCS5
Index has bad MFT record 177580 Adobe Illustrator CS4 Simplified Chinese Green Edition
Index has bad MFT records 175262 Monthly Summary (August 2017). doc
Index has bad MFT records 163492 miscellaneous
Index has bad MFT record 104847 Shenzhen Office (Bear)
Index has bad MFT record 105097 production
Index has bad MFT records 164916 comes with software
Index has bad MFT record 175138 Design Contract. doc
Index has bad MFT record 209241 Thunderbolt download
Index has bad MFT record 209242 Thunder Cloud Disk
Index has bad MFT record 171493 HaloCloud
Index entry has bad MFT record 165404LaserJet_m1005.exe
Index entry has bad MFT records 165709OJ7110_971-2. exe
Index entry has bad MFT record 167306stylus_photo_r230.exe
Index has bad MFT record 177572Adobe photoshopCS5.3965557328.zip
Index has a bad MFT record of 177577Adobe Illustrator CS4
Index entry has bad MFT record 209667BaiduNetdiskDownload
Index has bad MFT record 171271C5ECB71606CC
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.