[PATCH] ide-iops: fix for drive side 80-wire cable detection failure f or IBM-DJNA-371350 HD

[PATCH] ide-iops: fix for drive side 80-wire cable detection failure f or IBM-DJNA-371350 HD

[Michael Gavlick]

  The IDE driver complains about an 80-wire cable detection failure and falls back to UDMA/33 for the old IBM-DJNA-371350 Rev. J7NOA30K HD even though it is an UDMA/66 HD.

Kernel Message:
"hdb: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4
hdb: drive side 80-wire cable detection failed, limiting max speed to UDMA33
hdb: UDMA/33 mode selected"

  This patch disables the word 93 validity check in /drivers/ide/ide-iops.c for this particular hardware by adding it to the buggy firmware ivb_list. 

diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c b/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c
index 6cc6c83..6d6f78f 100644
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c
@@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ static const struct drive_list_entry ivb_list[] = {
 	{ "TSSTcorp CDDVDW SH-S202H"	, "SB00"	},
 	{ "TSSTcorp CDDVDW SH-S202H"	, "SB01"	},
 	{ "SAMSUNG SP0822N"		, "WA100-10"	},
+        { "IBM-DJNA-371350"             , "J7NOA30K"    },
 	{ NULL				, NULL		}
 };




____________________________________________________________
Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/fc/BLSrjnsEGrFwnIvIOVxbEtcxl1mbToJZIUdYtrSAhgUZhuqeEORJOOJ5xRW/

Re: [PATCH] ide-iops: fix for drive side 80-wire cable detection failure f or IBM-DJNA-371350 HD

[Jeff Garzik]

On 09/27/2009 07:34 PM, Michael Gavlick wrote:
>    The IDE driver complains about an 80-wire cable detection failure and falls back to UDMA/33 for the old IBM-DJNA-371350 Rev. J7NOA30K HD even though it is an UDMA/66 HD.
>
> Kernel Message:
> "hdb: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4
> hdb: drive side 80-wire cable detection failed, limiting max speed to UDMA33
> hdb: UDMA/33 mode selected"
>
>    This patch disables the word 93 validity check in /drivers/ide/ide-iops.c for this particular hardware by adding it to the buggy firmware ivb_list.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c b/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c
> index 6cc6c83..6d6f78f 100644
> --- a/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c
> +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c
> @@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ static const struct drive_list_entry ivb_list[] = {
>   	{ "TSSTcorp CDDVDW SH-S202H"	, "SB00"	},
>   	{ "TSSTcorp CDDVDW SH-S202H"	, "SB01"	},
>   	{ "SAMSUNG SP0822N"		, "WA100-10"	},
> +        { "IBM-DJNA-371350"             , "J7NOA30K"    },
>   	{ NULL				, NULL		}

Would you create the libata version of this patch, too, please?

We are [very slowly] migrating away from the old-IDE driver.

	Jeff

Re: [PATCH] ide-iops: fix for drive side 80-wire cable detection failure f or IBM-DJNA-371350 HD

[Mikael Pettersson]

Michael Gavlick writes:
 >   The IDE driver complains about an 80-wire cable detection failure and falls back to UDMA/33 for the old IBM-DJNA-371350 Rev. J7NOA30K HD even though it is an UDMA/66 HD.
 > 
 > Kernel Message:
 > "hdb: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4
 > hdb: drive side 80-wire cable detection failed, limiting max speed to UDMA33
 > hdb: UDMA/33 mode selected"
 > 
 >   This patch disables the word 93 validity check in /drivers/ide/ide-iops.c for this particular hardware by adding it to the buggy firmware ivb_list. 

Have you verified that the cable actually is 80-wire? If the problem
is buggy disk firmware, the message should disappear if you connect
a different known good UDMA/66 or better disk to this cable.

What model is the IDE controller?

Re: [PATCH] ide-iops: fix for drive side 80-wire cable detection failure f or IBM-DJNA-371350 HD

[Alan Cox]

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:34:19 GMT
"Michael Gavlick" <mgavl69@juno.com> wrote:

>   The IDE driver complains about an 80-wire cable detection failure and falls back to UDMA/33 for the old IBM-DJNA-371350 Rev. J7NOA30K HD even though it is an UDMA/66 HD.

You need to verify that this isn't a problem with the controller, the
driver or the configuration before submitting such a patch.

It's a very common drive so the fact nobody has reported it before makes
me extremely suspicious of your report being a true IVB error - the drive
is also rather new for that bug.

Alan