From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Make the IDE DMA timeout modifiable Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:18:37 +0400 Message-ID: <469CCFBD.4030708@ru.mvista.com> References: <200706160123.55636.bzolnier@gmail.com> <4693D9B6.4090408@ru.mvista.com> <20070713161612.2f2ebb0b@the-village.bc.nu> <46979652.6040201@rtr.ca> <4697987E.3040406@ru.mvista.com> <4697D425.7000300@rtr.ca> <4697D518.7010108@ru.mvista.com> <4697D686.6090104@rtr.ca> <4697DAAE.5090704@ru.mvista.com> <4697E7E2.70303@rtr.ca> <20070716192925.GA10124@bitwizard.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from homer.mvista.com ([63.81.120.155]:13498 "EHLO imap.sh.mvista.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933853AbXGQOQf (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:16:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070716192925.GA10124@bitwizard.nl> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Rogier Wolff Cc: Mark Lord , Alan Cox , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Suleiman Souhlal , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello. Rogier Wolff wrote: >>> Ah, that makes sense -- during PIO interrupts happen a lot more often. >>>20 secs still seem to be too much. >>I don't think so, even for modern drives. >>Figure 8-10 seconds max for spin-up, >>plus 6-9 seconds to do a sector re-assignment >>or retries on a bad block (a measured *real-life* value). >>That adds up to 14-19 seconds, so 20 seconds is probably good. >>Still, this does need to be adjustable for faster (CF) devices, >>and slower (optical/tape) devices, rather than just a single >>set of fixed timeout values. > In real life, with real bad blocks on real harddrives, some harddrives > take more than the DMA TIMEOUT time to read a single block, even without > having to spin up. Yeah, "shit happens". > The current code then resets the drive, on which the drive reports > "busy, not ready for command", and things go downhill from there. You are clearly mixing things: this message is a result of retrying command in PIO mode (that fails because the drive is still busy), and then the drives are actually reset. If they keep being busy *after* that, all I'd say is dump them ASAP. ;-) > Roger. MBR, Sergei