From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Lord Subject: Re: [PATCH] blacklist NCQ on Seagate Barracuda ST380817AS Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 13:26:50 -0400 Message-ID: <46FFDC5A.7070509@rtr.ca> References: <20070930160548.235be972@localhost> <20070930152908.1f58d39d@the-village.bc.nu> <20070930164610.20818867@localhost> <46FFBB2D.6060004@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from rtr.ca ([76.10.145.34]:4776 "EHLO mail.rtr.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756056AbXI3R0w (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Sep 2007 13:26:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: <46FFBB2D.6060004@garzik.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Paolo Ornati , Alan Cox , Tejun Heo , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Jeff Garzik wrote: > Paolo Ornati wrote: >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 15:29:08 +0100 >> Alan Cox wrote: >> >>>> Seagate Barracuda ST380817AS has troubles with NCQ. For example, >>>> unpacking a tarball on an XFS filesystem gives this: >>>> >>>> ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1 SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen >>>> ata1.00: cmd 61/40:00:29:a3:98/00:00:00:00:00/40 tag 0 cdb 0x0 data >>>> 32768 out >>>> res 40/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask 0x4 (timeout) >>> What makes you sure that is an NCQ problem ? >> >> It goes away with: >> echo 1 > /sys/block/sda/device/queue_depth >> >> I have this problem only with XFS, and even with XFS it goes away >> mounting with "nobarrier"... > > This last is an interesting datapoint. > > I wonder if libata has a generic problem with NCQ + FLUSH CACHE. Yeah, that's pretty suspicious. Prior to issuing a FLUSH_CACHE op, one must first drain all outstanding NCQ commands (and not issue new ones). I'm sure the code must *try* to do that, but perhaps there's a bug in there? Or just another drive bug? ??