Re: Another Seagate SATA drive with the NCQ+FLUSH_CACHE bug

Re: Another Seagate SATA drive with the NCQ+FLUSH_CACHE bug

[Andrew Morton]

(cc linux-ide)

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:54:51 -0500 "Kyle Moffett" <kyle@moffetthome.net> wrote:

> I've got a 250GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250820AS) with firmware
> 3.AAE on it here that seems to suffer from the same problem hang
> problem as a number of similar seagate drives.  What information do I
> need to provide to get it added to the blacklist?  Beyond that I'm
> also going through seagate support to try to get a firmware upgrade
> for the thing, as performance without NCQ tends to be not-so-good.
> 
> Kernel messages of the SATA error below (it's on an ICH controller of
> some variety).
> 
> Cheers,
> Kyle Moffett
> 
> [100226.331199] ata1.01: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen
> [100226.331241] ata1.01: cmd ea/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/b0 tag 0
> [100226.331244]          res 40/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask
> 0x4 (timeout)
> [100226.331821] ata1.01: status: { DRDY }
> [100231.371102] ata1: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
> [100236.353120] ata1: device not ready (errno=-16), forcing hardreset
> [100236.353156] ata1: soft resetting link
> [100241.551827] ata1: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
> [100246.367827] ata1: SRST failed (errno=-16)
> [100246.367859] ata1: soft resetting link
> [100251.563827] ata1: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
> [100256.377083] ata1: SRST failed (errno=-16)
> [100256.377116] ata1: soft resetting link
> [100261.575827] ata1: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
> [100291.423827] ata1: SRST failed (errno=-16)
> [100291.423861] ata1: soft resetting link
> [100296.451826] ata1: SRST failed (errno=-16)
> [100296.451855] ata1: reset failed, giving up
> [100296.451881] ata1.00: disabled
> [100296.451906] ata1.01: disabled
> [100296.451950] ata1: EH complete

Re: Another Seagate SATA drive with the NCQ+FLUSH_CACHE bug

[Tejun Heo]

Hello, Kyle, Andrew.

Andrew Morton wrote:
> (cc linux-ide)
> 
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:54:51 -0500 "Kyle Moffett" <kyle@moffetthome.net> wrote:
> 
>> I've got a 250GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250820AS) with firmware
>> 3.AAE on it here that seems to suffer from the same problem hang
>> problem as a number of similar seagate drives.  What information do I
>> need to provide to get it added to the blacklist?  Beyond that I'm
>> also going through seagate support to try to get a firmware upgrade
>> for the thing, as performance without NCQ tends to be not-so-good.
>>
>> Kernel messages of the SATA error below (it's on an ICH controller of
>> some variety).
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Kyle Moffett
>>
>> [100226.331199] ata1.01: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen
>> [100226.331241] ata1.01: cmd ea/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/b0 tag 0
>> [100226.331244]          res 40/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask
>> 0x4 (timeout)
>> [100226.331821] ata1.01: status: { DRDY }
>> [100231.371102] ata1: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
>> [100236.353120] ata1: device not ready (errno=-16), forcing hardreset
>> [100236.353156] ata1: soft resetting link
>> [100241.551827] ata1: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
>> [100246.367827] ata1: SRST failed (errno=-16)
>> [100246.367859] ata1: soft resetting link
>> [100251.563827] ata1: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
>> [100256.377083] ata1: SRST failed (errno=-16)
>> [100256.377116] ata1: soft resetting link
>> [100261.575827] ata1: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0)
>> [100291.423827] ata1: SRST failed (errno=-16)
>> [100291.423861] ata1: soft resetting link
>> [100296.451826] ata1: SRST failed (errno=-16)
>> [100296.451855] ata1: reset failed, giving up
>> [100296.451881] ata1.00: disabled
>> [100296.451906] ata1.01: disabled
>> [100296.451950] ata1: EH complete

I don't think it's the same problem.  The disk doesn't go down on the
drives with SD1[5-9] firmwares.  More likely a broken drive, I think.
How reproducible is the problem?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun