From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [3/6] 2.6.21-rc2: known regressions Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:37:04 +0900 Message-ID: <45F53B60.8020908@gmail.com> References: <20070305015036.GH3441@stusta.de> <45EE9E39.3010800@garzik.org> <45F20541.9090208@crans.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <45F20541.9090208@crans.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?UTF-8?B?TWF0aGlldSBCw6lyYXJk?= Cc: Jeff Garzik , Adrian Bunk , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Michal Jaegermann , Fabio Comolli , Janosch Machowinski , Lukas Hejtmanek , Meelis Roos , Olivier Mondoloni , Thomas Renninger , Robert Moore , lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Mathieu B=C3=A9rard wrote: > Jeff Garzik a =C3=A9crit : >> Adrian Bunk wrote: >>> Subject : NCQ problem with ahci and Hitachi drive >>> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/4/178 >>> Submitter : Mathieu B=C3=A9rard >>> Status : unknown >> according to the last message in that thread, it sounds like ACPI an= d >> interrupt problems >> > Hi, > after more testing with a 2.6.21-rc3, it appears that after several a= ta > errors the boot process > somehow continued as normal, after a "NCQ disabled due to excessive > errors" message. > "pci=3Dnoacpi" or "noacpi" parameters workarounds the problem "irqpol= l" > does nothing. I was mistaken. It can't be IRQ routing problem. I somehow thought th= e port was a ata_piix one. Considering the reported broken NCQ feature o= n the device GTF might be mangling with the drive to disable NCQ or something. Does giving "libata.noacpi=3D1" make any difference? Thanks. --=20 tejun - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html