Re: 2.6.27.6 question: ata_sff_hsm_move: ata15 (why always ata15)?

[Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>]

Justin Piszcz wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008, Tejun Heo wrote:
> 
>> Alan Cox wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 21:22:58 -0600
>>> Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>>>> I am trying to find out what the root cause of this error/problem is:
>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462425
>>>> The problem is that people assume that timeouts with DRDY like that bug
>>>> refers to must be the same problem when it is often not
>>>
>>> The first stopping point is to apply the DRQ drain patch I sent to the
>>> list some time ago and is hopefully lined up for 2.6.29. After that
>>> point
>>> you can begin to look at the remaining cases, until then its hardly
>>> worth
>>> it.
>>
>> Is it really?  For many SATA controllers, DRQ draining isn't really
>> necessary.  PATA might be a completely different story tho.
> 
> I have been running with the patch for almost 24 hours and running
> extensive disk tests, so far nothing but sometimes it takes a few days
> or more to repeat, I am continuing to test to see if the problem recurs..

The patch only kicks in only when EH kicks in so you wouldn't know
whether it's effective or not till exception occurs.


-- 
tejun