From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mark Lord <liml@rtr.ca>
Subject: Re: LibPATA code issues / 2.6.17.3 (What is the next step?)
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 13:39:26 -0400
Message-ID: <44B7D6CE.4030406@rtr.ca>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0602140439580.3567@p34>  <44AEB3CA.8080606@pobox.com>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607071520160.2643@p34.internal.lan>  <200607091224.31451.liml@rtr.ca>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607091327160.23992@p34.internal.lan>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607091612060.3886@p34.internal.lan>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607091638220.2696@p34.internal.lan>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607091645480.2696@p34.internal.lan>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607091704250.2696@p34.internal.lan>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607091802460.2696@p34.internal.lan>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607100958540.3591@p34.internal.lan> <1152545639.27368.137.camel@localhost.localdomain> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607101145030.3591@p34.internal.lan> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607110926150.858@p34.internal.lan> <44B7D168.2080304@rtr.ca> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607141318040.1687@p34.internal.lan>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from rtr.ca ([64.26.128.89]:60901 "EHLO mail.rtr.ca")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422679AbWGNRj1 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 14 Jul 2006 13:39:27 -0400
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607141318040.1687@p34.internal.lan>
Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
To: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>, Sander <sander@humilis.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>

Justin Piszcz wrote:
> They are Western Digital 400* drives.
> 
> [4294678.049000]   Vendor: ATA       Model: WDC WD4000KD-00N  Rev: 01.0
> [4294678.050000]   Vendor: ATA       Model: WDC WD4000KD-00N  Rev: 01.0
> 
> On a SiL controller, it also happens when they are on a promise 
> controller too.
> 
> On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, Mark Lord wrote:
> 
>> Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>>
>>> opcode=0x35 & opcode=0xca
>>
>> Those are non-DMA WRITE opcodes.  Using PIO for I/O is pretty rare 
>> these days,
>> so I'm betting that this is not a hard disk device -- compactflash?

Okay.  So why are we issuing PIO WRITE commands to drives that
obviously should only be sent DMA commands by libata?

Perhaps that's the bug.