From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: libata timeouts when stressing a Samsung HDD Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:32:51 +0900 Message-ID: <499DFA33.8090009@kernel.org> References: <20090202164053.4ecca9dd@dhcp-100-2-144.bos.redhat.com> <49922A2D.508@kernel.org> <49924F48.4000009@rtr.ca> <20090211152908.383744cd@dhcp-100-2-144.bos.redhat.com> <49934B20.4060206@rtr.ca> <49934D24.1050204@garzik.org> <4993A57D.6010107@gmail.com> <499D7A4B.5010804@rtr.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:50824 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751861AbZBTAdI (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2009 19:33:08 -0500 In-Reply-To: <499D7A4B.5010804@rtr.ca> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Lord Cc: Robert Hancock , Jeff Garzik , Chuck Ebbert , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Mark Lord wrote: >>ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen >>ata1.00: cmd ea/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 tag 0 >> res 40/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask 0x4 (timeout) >>ata1.00: status: { DRDY } > >>>> I wonder if it's just a case of too short a timeout on the cache >>>> flushes? > .. >> However, in this case the drive is not reporting Busy status at the >> timeout, which suggests maybe an interrupt got lost or something. >> (Could be still the drive's fault.) > .. > > If I recall correctly, The reported shadow register contents are bogus > when a timeout occurs. So we don't actually know what the drive state was. > > Or do we, Tejun? Yeah, it's bogus. Maybe we should just report zeros. Thanks. -- tejun