Ask Ubuntu is a question and answer site for Ubuntu users and developers. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have a 1TB disk with a single ext4 partition.

here's some output of parted print all command

Model: ATA Hitachi HDS72101 (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 1000GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/4096B
Partition Table: loop

Number  Start  End     Size    File system  Flags
 1      0.00B  1000GB  1000GB  ext4

However fdisk reports that there is no valid partition

Disk /dev/sdb: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/sdb doesn't contain a valid partition table

testdisk /dev/sdb reports

Disk /dev/sdb - 1000 GB / 931 GiB - CHS 121601 255 63
Current partition structure:
     Partition                  Start        End    Size in sectors

Partition sector doesn't have the endmark 0xAA55

then testdisk deepscan finds

Linux           0   0  1 121601  80 63 1953525168 [storage]

When I try to add this partition in testdisk it doesn't do anything and just exits to screen showing no partitions.

dumpe2fs -h /dev/sdb returns the following information

dumpe2fs 1.42.5 (29-Jul-2012)
Filesystem volume name:   storage
Last mounted on:          /mnt/storage
Filesystem UUID:          5889e47c-b13b-4157-9161-0e7a31095b12
Filesystem magic number:  0xEF53
Filesystem revision #:    1 (dynamic)
Filesystem features:      has_journal ext_attr resize_inode dir_index
                          filetype extent flex_bg sparse_super large_file 
                          huge_file uninit_bg dir_nlink extra_isize
Filesystem flags:         signed_directory_hash 
Default mount options:    user_xattr acl
Filesystem state:         clean
Errors behavior:          Continue
Filesystem OS type:       Linux
Inode count:              61054976
Block count:              244190646
Reserved block count:     12209532
Free blocks:              139902528
Free inodes:              60775208
First block:              0
Block size:               4096
Fragment size:            4096
Reserved GDT blocks:      965
Blocks per group:         32768
Fragments per group:      32768
Inodes per group:         8192
Inode blocks per group:   512
Flex block group size:    16
Filesystem created:       Sat Sep 15 14:29:58 2012
Last mount time:          Sat Jun  1 19:53:40 2013
Last write time:          Sat Jun  1 22:29:09 2013
Mount count:              0
Maximum mount count:      -1
Last checked:             Sat Jun  1 22:29:09 2013
Check interval:           0 (<none>)
Lifetime writes:          79 GB
Reserved blocks uid:      0 (user root)
Reserved blocks gid:      0 (group root)
First inode:              11
Inode size:           256
Required extra isize:     28
Desired extra isize:      28
Journal inode:            8
Default directory hash:   half_md4
Directory Hash Seed:      1d72f9a3-8c59-4b86-9e02-b9ab512ce90c
Journal backup:           inode blocks
Journal features:         journal_incompat_revoke
Journal size:             128M
Journal length:           32768
Journal sequence:         0x00009489
Journal start:            0

this is my secondary data drive that I use daily. I have data on it that I'd rather not nuke. I'm not sure if I should be concerned about this or if I should not worry about it. The disk works but I don't know if it's a failure waiting to happen.

Question: Where to go from here if I want to make sure the disk is setup optimally?

share|improve this question
up vote 3 down vote accepted

It looks to me like you've got the filesystem placed "raw" on the disk, without using any partition table. This is unusual and limiting, but it does work. If you don't see any need to shrink the existing filesystem and add new partitions in the near future, I'd just leave it as-is, since adding a partition table to this setup will be difficult and perhaps a bit risky.

share|improve this answer
Thanks for the response. I do not have any need to change the partitions on this disk. I just want to be confident that my data will always be there. – Antonios Hadjigeorgalis Jun 2 '13 at 1:35

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.