From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: implement BROKEN_HPA horkage and apply it to HDS724040KLSA80 Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 11:21:08 +0900 Message-ID: <46B92894.8060502@gmail.com> References: <20070807054250.GQ13674@htj.dyndns.org> <20070807162529.1781b21c@the-village.bc.nu> <46B89177.2040209@gmail.com> <20070807175844.6818ffc9@the-village.bc.nu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.190]:59370 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757567AbXHHCWS (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2007 22:22:18 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k20so22206rvb for ; Tue, 07 Aug 2007 19:22:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20070807175844.6818ffc9@the-village.bc.nu> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: Jeff Garzik , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org, kelk1@comcast.net, lcapitulino@mandriva.com.br Alan Cox wrote: >>> I'd rather know what is going on here. A drive can legitimately >>> support LBA48 and HPA and refuse READ_NATIVE_MAX_EXT. >> READ_NATIVE_MAX_EXT is mandatory if HPA && LBA48, no > > Ok the report in that thread is different. The offending Maxtor simply > aborts the read_native_max_ext I'll resend sans ata_id_has_hpa() change. Does that sound okay? I don't really think we can do anything other than blacklisting it. -- tejun