* Re: Possible data corruption sata_sil24? [not found] ` <20070713115919.GC17811@jabberwocky.com> @ 2007-07-18 8:53 ` Tejun Heo 2007-07-18 12:31 ` David Shaw 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Tejun Heo @ 2007-07-18 8:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dshaw; +Cc: linux-ide, linux-raid David Shaw wrote: >>> It fails whether I use a raw /dev/sdd or partition it into one large >>> /dev/sdd1, or partition into multiple partitions. sata_sil24 seems to >>> work by itself, as does dm, but as soon as I mix sata_sil24+dm, I get >>> corruption. >> Hmmmm.... Can you reproduce the corruption by accessing both devices >> simultaneously without using dm? Considering ich5 does fine, it looks >> like hardware and/or driver problem and I really wanna rule out dm. > > I think I wasn't clear enough before. The corruption happens when I > use dm to create two dm mappings that both reside on the same real > device. Using two different devices, or two different partitions on > the same physical device works properly. ich5 does fine with these 3 > tests, but sata_sil24 fails: > > * /dev/sdd, create 2 dm linear mappings on it, mke2fs and use those > dm "devices" == corruption > > * Partition /dev/sdd into /dev/sdd1 and /dev/sdd2, mke2fs and use > those partitions == no corruption > > * Partition /dev/sdd into /dev/sdd1 and /dev/sdd2, create 2 dm linear > mappings on /dev/sdd1, mke2fs and use those dm "devices" == > corruption I'm not sure whether this is problem of sata_sil24 or dm layer. Cc'ing linux-raid for help. How much memory do you have? One big difference between ata_piix and sata_sil24 is that sil24 can handle 64bit DMA. Maybe dma mapping or something interacts weirdly with dm there? Thanks. -- tejun ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Possible data corruption sata_sil24? 2007-07-18 8:53 ` Possible data corruption sata_sil24? Tejun Heo @ 2007-07-18 12:31 ` David Shaw 2007-07-19 8:03 ` Tejun Heo 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: David Shaw @ 2007-07-18 12:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tejun Heo; +Cc: linux-ide, linux-raid On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 05:53:39PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > David Shaw wrote: > >>> It fails whether I use a raw /dev/sdd or partition it into one large > >>> /dev/sdd1, or partition into multiple partitions. sata_sil24 seems to > >>> work by itself, as does dm, but as soon as I mix sata_sil24+dm, I get > >>> corruption. > >> Hmmmm.... Can you reproduce the corruption by accessing both devices > >> simultaneously without using dm? Considering ich5 does fine, it looks > >> like hardware and/or driver problem and I really wanna rule out dm. > > > > I think I wasn't clear enough before. The corruption happens when I > > use dm to create two dm mappings that both reside on the same real > > device. Using two different devices, or two different partitions on > > the same physical device works properly. ich5 does fine with these 3 > > tests, but sata_sil24 fails: > > > > * /dev/sdd, create 2 dm linear mappings on it, mke2fs and use those > > dm "devices" == corruption > > > > * Partition /dev/sdd into /dev/sdd1 and /dev/sdd2, mke2fs and use > > those partitions == no corruption > > > > * Partition /dev/sdd into /dev/sdd1 and /dev/sdd2, create 2 dm linear > > mappings on /dev/sdd1, mke2fs and use those dm "devices" == > > corruption > > I'm not sure whether this is problem of sata_sil24 or dm layer. Cc'ing > linux-raid for help. How much memory do you have? One big difference > between ata_piix and sata_sil24 is that sil24 can handle 64bit DMA. > Maybe dma mapping or something interacts weirdly with dm there? The machine has 640 megs of RAM. FWIW, I tried this with 512 megs of RAM with the same results. Running Memtest86+ shows the memory is good. David ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Possible data corruption sata_sil24? 2007-07-18 12:31 ` David Shaw @ 2007-07-19 8:03 ` Tejun Heo 0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Tejun Heo @ 2007-07-19 8:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tejun Heo, linux-ide, linux-raid David Shaw wrote: >> I'm not sure whether this is problem of sata_sil24 or dm layer. Cc'ing >> linux-raid for help. How much memory do you have? One big difference >> between ata_piix and sata_sil24 is that sil24 can handle 64bit DMA. >> Maybe dma mapping or something interacts weirdly with dm there? > > The machine has 640 megs of RAM. FWIW, I tried this with 512 megs of > RAM with the same results. Running Memtest86+ shows the memory is > good. Hmmm... I see, so no DMA to the wrong address problem then. Let's see whether dm people can help us out. Thanks. -- tejun ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-07-19 8:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20070706012432.GB29789@jabberwocky.com>
[not found] ` <4693A5A0.5070306@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20070713014252.GA17811@jabberwocky.com>
[not found] ` <46972AEE.2040805@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20070713115919.GC17811@jabberwocky.com>
2007-07-18 8:53 ` Possible data corruption sata_sil24? Tejun Heo
2007-07-18 12:31 ` David Shaw
2007-07-19 8:03 ` Tejun Heo
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).