From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Tokarev Subject: SATA: Is "DPO and FUA" ever supported? Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 17:30:02 +0400 Message-ID: <467A7D5A.9070009@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hobbit.corpit.ru ([81.13.94.6]:22245 "EHLO hobbit.corpit.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751106AbXFUNhV (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 09:37:21 -0400 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On each and every machine out there, and on every dmesg output posted on numerous mailinglists, I see messages similar to this: scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access ATA ST3250620NS 3.AE PQ: 0 ANSI: 5 SCSI device sda: 488397168 512-byte hdwr sectors (250059 MB) SCSI device sda: write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA for SATA disk drives. And I wonder -- are those features supported at all by linux, and/or are there disk drives out there which supports it as well? For my Seagate ST3250620NS SATA drive (it's a "server" drive, whatever it means), I can see -- at least -- * Mandatory FLUSH_CACHE * FLUSH_CACHE_EXT reported by hdparm -I. I wonder what "FLUSH CACHE EXT" means, and whenever it can be used to support DPO and/or FUA... Thanks. /mjt