From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "I Stratford" Subject: Re: Promise SATA TX4 300 port timeout with sata_promise in 2.6.22, kernel panic in 2.6.23 Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:33:55 -0800 Message-ID: <6f048fc10711140033x43358a8cxf5e9df8d4328d135@mail.gmail.com> References: <200711121025.lACAPf3S017955@harpo.it.uu.se> <473840A2.5090909@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.225]:51089 "EHLO nz-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751499AbXKNId4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Nov 2007 03:33:56 -0500 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s18so96814nze for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:33:56 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <473840A2.5090909@gmail.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Mikael Pettersson On Nov 12, 2007 4:01 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Mikael Pettersson wrote: > > First, a workaround for a HW erratum affecting 2nd-generation > > chips like the SATA300 TX4 was included in kernel 2.6.24-rc2. > ... > Alright, if it's fixable, no problem. I just wanted to remind that > running the link at 3Gbps isn't worth if it continues to cause problems. I appreciate the replies and ensuing discussion. I will test 2.6.24-rc2 as soon as possible and let you know the results. At that time I'll also have more runtime on the 1.5Gbps forced 2.622 and will be able to follow-up. Would you (Tejun, Mikael) prefer that I mail linux-ide or you directly? I checked for a linux-ide FAQ and didn't find one.. :) Mikael : > > Secondly, Stratford's system is seriously overloaded: > > ... > > - problems began when two Promise 300 TX4 cards and > > more disks were added > > On several occasions we've traced people's problems to > > overtaxed system components (cooling, PSU, PCI busses). Tejun: > Agreed, I've seen my share of those issues. Especially, SATA links seem > very dependent on power quality and very weird things happen when the > power isn't good enough. Easy way to debug this is connect half of the > drives to a separate PSU and see what happens. While I agree that the configuration is "seriously overloaded" (I believe I described it as "admittedly somewhat insane" ;D) I haven't experienced any port-resets or timeouts on my new TX4 300s, coming up on a week of runtime with the 1.5Gbps-only 2.6.22 patched kernel. Also, the problems did not generally extend to the two pre-existing TX4 150s on the same PCI bus, even when the TX4 300s were having problems. If hardware overheating/PCI overload/PSU problems were the cause, it seems like a very lucky coincidence that stepping the TX4 300s to 1.5Gbps mode also resolves it. :D The system's 23 drives are spread across 3 good quality power supplies. As indicated in my initial mail, I have swapped the PSU on the new drive with a new one, specifically a 430 watt cooler master PSU which by my kill-a-watt gives me ~250 watts of headroom even during spin-up. While my building power is notoriously lousy, I find a building-power or PSU-power-quality explanation somewhat unlikely, especially in light of the consistent performance of the two TX4 150s and the night-and-day performance of 1.5Gbps patched 2.6.22 vice unpatched 2.6.22 on the two TX4 300s. Of course, when you're dealing with 23 hard drives in a desktop.. who knows! Thanks for the replies! :D ___ids