From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: ata1.00: spurious completions during NCQ Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 11:17:26 +0900 Message-ID: <47044D36.4090708@gmail.com> References: <200710011443.05629.elendil@planet.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.183]:16020 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753243AbXJDCRe (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Oct 2007 22:17:34 -0400 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id v27so26454wah for ; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 19:17:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <200710011443.05629.elendil@planet.nl> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Frans Pop Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Frans Pop wrote: > Hi, > > On 15 August 2007 Tejun Heo wrote: >> You don't need to worry too much as long as errors are properly, >> recovered. All commands are retried and you won't lose any data. >> Please report if the spurious NCQ problem happens again. Thanks. > > I've just received a logcheck mail with another one. I have not seen any in > the time between my initial mail [1] and now, so this is the second > occurrence in 1.5 months. The message is slightly different this time. > > I'm currently running 2.6.23-rc8 + CFS patchset. > > kernel: ata1.00: spurious completions during NCQ issue=0x0 SAct=0x8 FIS=005040a1:00000004 > kernel: ata1.00: cmd 60/58:18:b3:56:bd/00:00:01:00:00/40 tag 3 cdb 0x0 data 45056 in > kernel: res 50/00:58:b3:56:bd/00:00:01:00:00/40 Emask 0x2 (HSM violation) > kernel: ata1: soft resetting port > kernel: ata1: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) > kernel: ata1.00: configured for UDMA/133 > kernel: ata1: EH complete > kernel: sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 321672960 512-byte hardware sectors (164697 MB) > kernel: sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off > kernel: sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00 > kernel: sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA Please post the result of "hdparm -I /dev/sda". Thanks. -- tejun