Re: [PATCH] Re: [git patches] libata updates - (improve post-reset device ready test) regression

[Marc Dionne <marc.c.dionne@gmail.com>]

08/05/08 10:57 PM, Tejun Heo:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
>>>> Tejun Heo (12):
>>>>       libata: improve post-reset device ready test
>>>
>>> This commit (78ab88f04f44bed566d51dce0c7cbfeff6449a06) causes a long
>>> boot delay with my onboard Promise controller. It seems like libata
>>> probes for a nonexisting PATA drive...
>>>
>>> ACPI: PCI Interrupt 0000:00:08.0[A] -> GSI 18 (level, low) -> IRQ 18
>>> scsi0 : sata_promise
>>> scsi1 : sata_promise
>>> scsi2 : sata_promise
>>> ata1: SATA max UDMA/133 mmio m4096@0xfb600000 port 0xfb600200 irq 18
>>> ata2: SATA max UDMA/133 mmio m4096@0xfb600000 port 0xfb600280 irq 18
>>> ata3: PATA max UDMA/133 mmio m4096@0xfb600000 port 0xfb600300 irq 18
>>> ata1: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300)
>>> ata2: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300)
>>> ata2.00: ATA-7: SAMSUNG HD753LJ, 1AA01109, max UDMA7
>>> ata2.00: 1465149168 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 0/32)
>>> ata2.00: configured for 
>>> UDMA/133                                                                                          
>>> ata3: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
>>> ata3: device not ready (errno=-16), forcing hardreset
>>> ata3: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
>>> ata3: SRST failed (errno=-16)
>>> ata3: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
>>> ata3: SRST failed (errno=-16)
>>> ata3: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
>>> ata3: SRST failed (errno=-16)
>>>   - Last output repeated twice -
>>> ata3: reset failed, giving up
>>
>> Does the attached patch fix things?
>>
>> It basically reverts the patch, while still maintaining the 
>> consolidation.  It looks like that status evaluation is not as 
>> universal as believed.
> 
> This means that we need to make custom readiness tests for controllers 
> using 0x77 or 0x7f.  Eeeek... Both groups of controllers are behaving in 
> incorrect way.  Controllers shouldn't use 0x77 or 0x7f for either busy 
> or ready states - it's invalid for both, yet, some use the 77/7f for 
> busy while others use them for ready state.  Great.  :-(
> 
> Jeff, can you please revert 78ab88f04f44bed566d51dce0c7cbfeff6449a06 for 
> now?  I'll post updated patch.
> 
> Markus, Alexey, Marc, which controllers are you using?
> 
> Thanks.
> 

nVidia NForce4 chipset, sata_nv driver:

00:06.0 IDE interface: nVidia Corporation CK804 IDE (rev f2)
00:08.0 IDE interface: nVidia Corporation CK804 Serial ATA Controller (rev f3)

Marc