Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8936] New: sata_promise 2.09 fails to identify ST3400832AS

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 19:12:31 +0200 (MEST)
Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@it.uu.se> wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 22:21:47 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 21:14:49 -0700 (PDT) bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> > 
> > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8936
> > > 
> > >            Summary: sata_promise 2.09 fails to identify ST3400832AS
> > >            Product: IO/Storage
> > >            Version: 2.5
> > >      KernelVersion: 2.6.23-rc1
> > >           Platform: All
> > >         OS/Version: Linux
> > >               Tree: Mainline
> > >             Status: NEW
> > >           Severity: high
> > >           Priority: P1
> > >          Component: Serial ATA
> > >         AssignedTo: jgarzik@pobox.com
> > >         ReportedBy: sziemba@ecn.purdue.edu
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Most recent kernel where this bug did not occur: 2.6.22 
> > > 
> > > Using git bisect I have identified the first bad commit.
> > > 
> > > linux-2.6# git bisect good
> > > a77720ad0a4049e4bc6355e4febf899966a48222 is first bad commit
> > > commit a77720ad0a4049e4bc6355e4febf899966a48222
> > > Author: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@it.uu.se>
> > > Date:   Tue Jul 3 01:09:05 2007 +0200
> > > 
> > > Distribution: Debian etch (stable)
> > > 
> > > Hardware Environment: Sun Fire x4100
> > > (http://www.crocom.com.pl/ulotki/X4100.pdf)
> > > 8 ST3400832AS drives connected to Promise FastTrak TX4200
> > > 2 ST973401LSUN72G drives connected to on board Fusion SAS
> > > 
> > > Software Environment:
> > > Problem Description:  
> > > 
> > > I will attach dmesg output, hdparm and lspci.  I have tried acpi=noirq, noapic,
> > >  irqpoll and pci=routeirq.  The drives connected to promise controller fail to
> > > identify.  The dmesg for rc-3 with sata_promise 2.09 is truncated as the kernel
> > > loops indefinitely.  Replacing sata_promise.c with version 2.08 from previous
> > > kernels allows 2.6.23-rc3 to boot (with some warnings during compile/boot).
> > > 
> > > Steps to reproduce:  Boot the machine with the promise card connected.
> > > 
> > 
> > Thanks for doing the bisection - it really helps.
> > 
> > Michal, one for the regression file, please.
> > 
> > Mikael: tsk ;)
> 
> According to the lspci the boards are FastTrak TX4200 with DID 0x3519.
> Unfortunately these aren't publicly documented, but judging from what
> little information there is in Promise's partial-source FT TX4200 driver,
> DID 0x3519 is a second-generation chip.
> 
> However, sata_promise.c declares it as a first-generation chip, which
> changes some details. This didn't matter too much before, but with the
> hotplug changes in 2.6.23-rc1, it matters more because the location of
> the SATA hotplug register is different in 1st and 2nd generation chips.
> (There are also some "failed to resume link for reset" errors with the
> 2.08 driver that may be caused by the 1st-vs-2nd generation confusion.)
> 
> I suspect that correcting the driver to mark DID 0x3515/0x3519 as
> 2nd-generation should fix the problem. The patch below does just that;
> please try it and let us know if it makes any difference.
> 
> /Mikael
> 
> --- linux-2.6.23-rc3/drivers/ata/sata_promise.c.~1~	2007-08-18 21:51:23.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc3/drivers/ata/sata_promise.c	2007-08-25 18:55:37.000000000 +0200
> @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@
>  #include "sata_promise.h"
>  
>  #define DRV_NAME	"sata_promise"
> -#define DRV_VERSION	"2.09"
> +#define DRV_VERSION	"2.10"
>  
>  enum {
>  	PDC_MAX_PORTS		= 4,
> @@ -328,8 +328,8 @@ static const struct pci_device_id pdc_at
>  
>  	{ PCI_VDEVICE(PROMISE, 0x3318), board_20319 },
>  	{ PCI_VDEVICE(PROMISE, 0x3319), board_20319 },
> -	{ PCI_VDEVICE(PROMISE, 0x3515), board_20319 },
> -	{ PCI_VDEVICE(PROMISE, 0x3519), board_20319 },
> +	{ PCI_VDEVICE(PROMISE, 0x3515), board_40518 },
> +	{ PCI_VDEVICE(PROMISE, 0x3519), board_40518 },
>  	{ PCI_VDEVICE(PROMISE, 0x3d17), board_40518 },
>  	{ PCI_VDEVICE(PROMISE, 0x3d18), board_40518 },
>  

Stephen has updated the bugzilla report: all is now working OK.

If you think this patch is good to go, please send a signoff or send an
official copy to Jeff or something, thanks.