From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: add warning about possible HPA compatibility issue
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 01:15:00 +0200
Message-ID: <200905260115.00794.bzolnier@gmail.com>
References: <200905252348.08970.bzolnier@gmail.com> <200905260036.17718.bzolnier@gmail.com> <20090525233814.4cb8b1c2@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-ew0-f176.google.com ([209.85.219.176]:35323 "EHLO
	mail-ew0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753151AbZEYXKg (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 25 May 2009 19:10:36 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20090525233814.4cb8b1c2@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>, Jacob <fun2program8@yahoo.com>, Christopher Hogan <chris.c.hogan@gmail.com>, Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@gmail.com>, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>

On Tuesday 26 May 2009 00:38:14 Alan Cox wrote:
> > > NAK - this is extremely misleading and will just randomly terrify users,
> > > who may then set the paramater and corrupt things like BIOS save areas.
> > 
> > Please propose better description.
> 
> As was discussed before
> 
> Tejun has a patch in the queue which exposes the HPA and real sizes to
> the OS

In queue for 2.6.30?

> Libata can support revalidating a disc
> 
> Once the HPA/Real size data is there the tools can be tuned for this and
> a sysfs node added to switch hpa on/off per disc. At that point this can
> be done by the user space intelligently.

Unless you happen to have partition with tools in HPA area etc.

Also care to post link to the existing user-space tools with added HPA
support and documentation how to use them so I can start pointing people
reporting problems in this direction?

> The fact this is a user parameter is itself a problem.

Yes.  It is a problem but we can't reverse the history.

I fully agree w.r.t to proper handling of HPA but we need "something" in
the meantime because it is *real* issue resulting in *real* users filling
*real* bug-reports (which unfortunately always get assigned to me first
so I'm needlessly wasting my time on them).

IOW Please stop downplaying bug #13365 which this patch tries to alleviate.

I'm adding Andrew to cc:...