RE: 2.6.23.1 - sata_mv (7042) hang with large file operations

Morrison, Tom
2007-11-16T17:10:55Z

Mark,

I've ported the old sataMV driver (version 3.6) to the 2.6.23.1
kernel - and it works - no problems with a full mem=4000M (4Gig).

The only problem with this is that it is MUCH slower than the
sata_mv driver which - by this test - definitely has some
bug/dependency that gets broken when the physical memory
overlaps its memory I/O locations (and should be iomapped &
dma mapped to a separate space up in 0xC_xxxx_xxxx)...

Time to dig in and debug this driver! UGH!

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Lord [mailto:liml@rtr.ca]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 5:14 PM
To: Morrison, Tom
Cc: Jeff Garzik; linux-ide@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.23.1 - sata_mv (7042) hang with large file operations

Morrison, Tom wrote:
> The plot thickens - it looks like it might be some type
> of problem interacting with the setup of my 4Gig DDR memory
> and how I setup some translation windows in my MPC8548E
>
> I realized this morning that I have an inbound/ output PEX window
> Translation Setup for mapping all from/to PEX bus to outside
> the physical 4GIG memory space (i.e.: up at 0xC_xxxx_xxxx). Thus,
> all output operations that translation from 0xC_xxxx_xxxx to
> the pci 32 bit address of xxxx_xxxx) - and vice versa for for
> the inbound. Note: we also have a straight 1:1 translation mapping
> as well for the lower 4Gig - so that's why this worked without
> the below mentioned change...
>
> So, I changed the Request & Response Hi Addresses (which were
> Being shifted by 32 bits down anyways) and 'OR' that with my
> 0xC (so the effective 64bit DMA address is 0xC_xxxx_xxxx (where
> Xxxx_xxxx is the effective address). This was what we did to
> solve the problem with the Marvel Linux driver that we got from
> the Marvel site....
>
> This all works just fine with ONLY 2 gig of memory in the system
> (and still have these inbound/output pex translation windows),
> but fails when I put back the 4 Gig (and the 8Gig) DDR memory.
>
> Unfortunately, this still hasn't solved the problem though -
> so there is something else which I am not seeing?
..
<snip patch that has no affect>