Re: amd64 cdrom access locks system

Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2005-06-14T07:55:22Z

[ Jens added to cc: ]

On 6/13/05, Jeff Wiegley <jeffw@cyte.com> wrote:
> Andrew Morton said I should carbon copy the IDE developer on this
> issue so I have in the hopes of re-opening this issue and making
> some progress since I'm still unable to write anything with my
> cd-burner.
>
> Here's what I know to date:
>
> I have the alim15x3 IDE driver installed and running.
> I do NOT have any of the generic IDE drivers installed or
> even compiled as they grossly interfere with the alim15x3
> and cause a kernel panic.
> My hardware is an AMD64 FX55 in a Shuttle ST20G5 case with a
> serial ATA harddrive.
> I'm using a stock 2.6.12-rc6 kernel.
> Debian unstable distribution.
>
> At first I can read from the drive fine.
> For instance I did two "cdparanoia -B -d /dev/hda" without
> a hitch. Nothing was reported in /var/log/kernel as a result.
>
> The problem is that I can't write to the drive (burn cds with
> cdrecord) with causing a lost interrupt and then nothing works;
> even reads don't respond.
>
> When I do:
> cdrecord -v -tao dev=ATAPI:/dev/hda something.iso
>
> I get this output:
> Cdrecord-Clone 2.01.01a01 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Copyright (C)
> 1995-2004 Joerg Schilling
> NOTE: this version of cdrecord is an inofficial (modified) release of
> cdrecord
> and thus may have bugs that are not present in the original
> version.
> Please send bug reports and support requests to
> <cdrtools@packages.debian.org>.
> The original author should not be bothered with problems of
> this version.
>
> cdrecord: Warning: Running on Linux-2.6.12-rc6-jw14
> cdrecord: There are unsettled issues with Linux-2.5 and newer.
> cdrecord: If you have unexpected problems, please try Linux-2.4 or
> Solaris.
> TOC Type: 1 = CD-ROM
> scsidev: 'ATAPI:/dev/hda'
> devname: 'ATAPI:/dev/hda'
> scsibus: -2 target: -2 lun: -2
> Warning: Using ATA Packet interface.
> Warning: The related Linux kernel interface code seems to be
> unmaintained.

^^^

> Warning: There is absolutely NO DMA, operations thus are slow.

^^^

What is the result of using "dev=/dev/hda" interface instead
(as suggested by Robert)?

Bartlomiej