From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: hardreset on SERR_INTERNAL Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 05:30:30 -0400 Message-ID: <45F7C0B6.4010205@garzik.org> References: <20070313162051.GH32687@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]:38766 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030803AbXCNJac (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2007 05:30:32 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070313162051.GH32687@htj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Tejun Heo wrote: > There was a rare report where SB600 reported SERR_INTERNAL and SRST > couldn't get it out of the failure mode. Hardreset on SERR_INTERNAL. > As the problem is intermittent, whether this fixes the problem or not > hasn't been verified yet, but hardresetting the channel on internal > error is a good idea anyway. > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-eh.c b/drivers/ata/libata-eh.c > index 7349c3d..fc11bb3 100644 > --- a/drivers/ata/libata-eh.c > +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-eh.c > @@ -1055,7 +1055,7 @@ static void ata_eh_analyze_serror(struct ata_port *ap) > } > if (serror & SERR_INTERNAL) { > err_mask |= AC_ERR_SYSTEM; > - action |= ATA_EH_SOFTRESET; > + action |= ATA_EH_HARDRESET; How does this interact with the patch ATI just posted, which prefers to treat the SB600 SERR_INTERNAL differently? Jeff