From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263031AbUB0WKI (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:10:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263163AbUB0WJy (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:09:54 -0500 Received: from codepoet.org ([166.70.99.138]:15516 "EHLO codepoet.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263167AbUB0WIk (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:08:40 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:08:38 -0700 From: Erik Andersen To: Alan Cox Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , John Bradford , Erik van Engelen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Subject: Re: Errors on 2th ide channel of promise ultra100 tx2 Message-ID: <20040227220837.GA984@codepoet.org> Reply-To: andersen@codepoet.org Mail-Followup-To: andersen@codepoet.org, Alan Cox , Marcelo Tosatti , John Bradford , Erik van Engelen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz References: <403F2178.70806@vanE.nl> <200402271820.i1RIKVLb000744@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk> <1077908499.29713.19.camel@dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1077908499.29713.19.camel@dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk> X-No-Junk-Mail: I do not want to get *any* junk mail. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri Feb 27, 2004 at 07:01:41PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > On Gwe, 2004-02-27 at 19:30, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > > Haven't got a clue about these "status=0x51" and "error=0x04". Anyone? > > > > > > Basically, the errors mean what they say - the drive is in an error > > > state, (received an unrecognised command), but is ready for further > > > operation. > > > > Received an unrecognised command from the kernel? What can cause that? > > Our early setup/probing code in 2.4.x at least may send stuff that very > very old disks don't understand. Its arguably a bug in the ident parsing > but it shouldnt ever be harmful Yes it is potentially harmful. Old drives that can't grok HPA are asked if they have an HPA, which i.e. will cause my old Samsung 400 MB drive to become very unhappy. I sent in a patch fixing it quite a while back. It was accepted into 2.6.x but the 2.4.x version never made it in... -Erik -- Erik B. Andersen http://codepoet-consulting.com/ --This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--