From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [RFT] major libata update Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 22:06:19 -0400 Message-ID: <446D281B.2060605@garzik.org> References: <20060515170006.GA29555@havoc.gtf.org> <20060516190507.35c1260f.akpm@osdl.org> <446AAB3C.6050303@gmail.com> <20060516215610.2b822c00.akpm@osdl.org> <446AB12C.10001@gmail.com> <446AC418.4070704@gmail.com> <20060518160758.5911e4b7.akpm@osdl.org> <20060519011400.GA10058@htj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:33684 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932176AbWESCGX (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 22:06:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20060519011400.GA10058@htj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org Tejun Heo wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 04:07:58PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >> Yes it does. I dropped it and got >> >> SCSI subsystem initialized >> ata_piix 0000:00:1f.2: MAP [ P0 P2 P1 P3 ] >> ACPI (acpi_bus-0191): Device is not power manageable [20060310] >> ACPI: PCI Interrupt 0000:00:1f.2[A] -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19 >> ata1: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x2148 ctl 0x217E bmdma 0x2110 irq 19 >> ata2: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x2140 ctl 0x217A bmdma 0x2118 irq 19 >> ata1: SATA port has no device. >> >> Then I undropped it and got >> >> SCSI subsystem initialized >> ata_piix 0000:00:1f.2: MAP [ P0 P2 P1 P3 ] >> ACPI (acpi_bus-0191): Device is not power manageable [20060310] >> ACPI: PCI Interrupt 0000:00:1f.2[A] -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19 >> ata1: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x2148 ctl 0x217E bmdma 0x2110 irq 19 >> ata2: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x2140 ctl 0x217A bmdma 0x2118 irq 19 >> ata1.00: ATA-7, max UDMA/133, 321672960 sectors: LBA48 NCQ (depth 0/32) >> ata1.00: configured for UDMA/133 >> scsi0 : ata_piix >> >> and a computer which boots. >> >> Look closer, please ;) > > Hello, Andrew. > > I see. It seems that you're reporting two separate problems - your > PCS register doesn't report presence properly && the TF registers > report ghost device if the first device is ATAPI. I can reproduce the > second here, but AFAIK the only controller which had problem with PCS > persence bits was ESB6300 until now. > > Can you post the result of 'lspci -n' and ata_piix boot probing > messages with the following patch applied? It would be helpful if you > tell us how devices are actually connected. Also, where did the patch > come from? With what comment? At this point it may be relevant to note that Intel tells me that PCS has changed on -every- chip. So, ICH8 PCS register behaves differently from ICH7 and prior. Jeff