From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: What's in libata-dev.git Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 22:03:39 +0400 Message-ID: <4523F77B.1030908@ru.mvista.com> References: <20060911132250.GA5178@havoc.gtf.org> <45056627.7030202@ru.mvista.com> <4523F602.6070608@rtr.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4523F602.6070608@rtr.ca> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Lord Cc: Jeff Garzik , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Hello. Mark Lord wrote: >>> [ATA] Increase lba48 max-sectors from 200 to 256. >> So was it for LBA28 or for LBA48? >> As for LBA28, it might be quite dangerous. Particularly, I know >> that IBM drives used to mistreated 256 as 0 in the past (bumped into >> that on a 8-year old drive which is still alive though). > .. >> The exact model was IBM DHEA-34331. > I've been travelling for the past month, so pardon the late tuning in here. > I've *never* encountered a drive that had this problem. > Controllers, yes, and those are easily dealt with in the chipset drivers. > > But never drives. Not since 1992 when I first took up Linux IDE stuff. > > I have some 7-year old IBM drives here, and they certainly don't have > this problem either (but they do have working TCQ etc..). That was 8-year old Ultra33 drive, what TCQ? :-) > I suspect Sergei simply had a bad controller card at the time. I can hardly imagine the reason why a PCI IDE controller (that was something like VT82C586 I think) would need to mess with the sector count reg. in PIO mode and return "command aborted" in the error reg... That was the exact sympthom IIRC. > Cheers WBR, Sergei