From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751027AbVHUOrV (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2005 10:47:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751029AbVHUOrV (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2005 10:47:21 -0400 Received: from a82-92-179-183.adsl.xs4all.nl ([82.92.179.183]:31815 "EHLO samwel.tk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751030AbVHUOrU (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2005 10:47:20 -0400 Message-ID: <43089400.1060603@samwel.tk> Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 16:47:28 +0200 From: Bart Samwel User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: andrea gelmini CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: DMA problem with kernel >2.6.10 References: <20050807164824.GA3312@gelma.net> In-Reply-To: <20050807164824.GA3312@gelma.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: bart@samwel.tk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on samwel.tk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org andrea gelmini wrote: > Hardware: Toshiba Satellite P20 (P4-3200 MHz, 512MB RAM) [1] > Software: Debian Unstable > GCC: 3.4.5 [2] > Memtest86+: v.1.60 (stress tools, CPU/RAM and so on, are all happy) > Problem: with kernel <=2.6.10 everything is all right... > but with any kernel released after 2.6.10 (pre, rc, stable, mm, and > so on), I've got this: > > hda: dma_timer_expiry: dma status == 0x21 > hda: DMA timeout error > hda: dma timeout error: status=0xd0 { Busy } [...] > It happen quickly if I do also something like this: > > cd /proc/sys/vm > echo 100 > dirty_background_ratio > echo 1000000 > dirty_expire_centisecs > echo 100 > dirty_ratio > echo 1000000 > dirty_writeback_centisecs I've had a report about this before, from someone who was using laptop mode -- same error message. Funny thing is, the laptop mode tools scripts also modify the above values, so it's probably the same problem. Until now I thought it was a Thinkpad hardware problem, because I only heard about these problems on Thinkpads, but apparently it's a kernel problem after all. Don't know anything about the causes though. --Bart