From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bogus LBA48 drives Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 13:24:11 -0500 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <406C5E4B.4020505@pobox.com> References: <20040331183410.GA3796@pclin040.win.tue.nl> <406B14C1.8000708@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:6345 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263028AbUDASYZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Apr 2004 13:24:25 -0500 In-Reply-To: List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Andries Brouwer , Andre Hedrick , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Lionel Bergeret , JunHyeok Heo , Linux Kernel Development , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Wed, 31 Mar 2004, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>Andries Brouwer wrote: >> >>>Hmm. I read in my copy of ATA7: >>> >>> 6.16.55 Words (103:100): Maximum user LBA for 48-bit Address feature set >>> Words (103:100) contain a value that is one greater than the maximum LBA >>> in user accessable space when the 48-bit Addressing feature set is supported. >>> The maximum value that shall be placed in this field is 0000FFFFFFFFFFFFh. >>> Support of these words is mandatory if the 48-bit Address feature set is supported. >>> >>>Do you read differently? >> >>The errata is, one needs to check that field for zero, and use the other >>one if so... > > > Which is not sufficient for `my' drives, since I get disk errors if I just use > the other capacity field and don't disable LBA48 completely. > > I'll check the ATA specs myself, if I find some time... If it's reporting the "48-bit feature set supported" but doesn't really support it, I'd vote for broken drive :) Maybe check for a firmware update on the manufacturer's web site? Jeff