From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shane Hathaway Subject: Re: Bug: Resume with Host Protected Area Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 21:43:20 -0600 Message-ID: <4265CFD8.4010408@hathawaymix.org> References: <4265640B.5060402@hathawaymix.org> <87f94c370504191420d2f5c32@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from 67.107.199.112.ptr.us.xo.net ([67.107.199.112]:13823 "EHLO hathawaymix.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261320AbVDTDnZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Apr 2005 23:43:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87f94c370504191420d2f5c32@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Greg Freemyer Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Greg Freemyer wrote: > IMHO, if you are going to put live data in the HPA, you really should > just kill the HPA permanently not depend on Linux to do a volitile > reset on every reboot/resume. > > See setmax at http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/setmax.c Thanks for the pointer. Still, I'm thinking of all the others who may have fallen into the same trap. I got into this situation purely by accident--I was never made aware of HPA at installation time; Linux must have disabled it automatically. Then it took me a year to guess that the problems with sleeping might be related to some peculiar messages I saw in the kernel logs. The HPA support needs to be all or nothing: either Linux disables HPA automatically at boot *and* at resume, or it doesn't touch HPA at all. Also, HPA shouldn't be disabled without user consent. IBM put the Windows installer in my laptop's HPA rather than provide installation CDs. There were no partition table entries indicating there was anything stored at the end of the drive, so when I installed Linux, I wiped out the Windows installer without knowing it. IBM still hasn't sent the replacement CDs. Shane