From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: Libata VIA woes continue. Worked around - *wrong* Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:57:59 -0400 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <41318C87.9010806@pobox.com> References: <412F3DEA.2070307@wasp.net.au> <41318680.8080102@wasp.net.au> 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]:59059 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267330AbUH2H6N (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:58:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: <41318680.8080102@wasp.net.au> List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Brad Campbell Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Brad Campbell wrote: > Brad Campbell wrote: > >> Ok, so after a couple of reboots with max_sector set to 200 the >> problem re-occurs. >> >> It must be something to do with programming the controller or timing >> or some other issue. >> >> I have worked around it by putting my 2 raid-0 drives on my spare >> promise ports, and at UDMA100 with transfers of 2048 sectors they >> behave fine no matter what I throw at them. > > > Scratch that. After a couple of days if intensive testing/rebooting and > abuse they play up on the > Promise controller in exactly the same failure mode. Just far harder to > trigger. > > I have removed these bridge board from my system now and thus the > problem no longer exists. I'm a > little concerned that this might show itself for other people in the > future but then I guess most > sane people buy SATA hard disks rather than re-use old ATA drives with > bridge boards. Well, there are some cases on a few controllers (SiI is one that comes to mind) where -- IIRC -- bridges dictate the max is UDMA/100, not UDMA/133, even if the underlying device is UDMA/133. In sata_promise.c or sata_via.c, what happens if you change udma_mask from 0x7f to 0x3f? Do the failures go away? > Cross that bridge if we come to it I guess. Guffaw ;-) Jeff