From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756364Ab0A0WoT (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:44:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756235Ab0A0WoS (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:44:18 -0500 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183]:22741 "EHLO ironport2-out.pppoe.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756200Ab0A0WoS (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:44:18 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AscAAIlQYEtLd/sX/2dsb2JhbAAIgzHFRI9fgSqCN1gE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,356,1262581200"; d="scan'208";a="54710626" Message-ID: <4B60C1C0.8050402@teksavvy.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:44:16 -0500 From: Mark Lord User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vishal Rao CC: Alan Cox , David Rees , jgarzik@pobox.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, trivial@kernel.org, stable@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: Disable NCQ for Crucial M225 brand SSDs References: <20100126160243.018b87e3@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <72dbd3151001261251s606ebf00h86c2ce63293305b6@mail.gmail.com> <72dbd3151001261632t7bbe43d0nb7490eae02185c81@mail.gmail.com> <20100127010204.7976c38b@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Vishal Rao wrote: > http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/347122/ > > I'm running Ubuntu Lucid 10.04 alphas at the moment and note that even > if I "successfully reproduce" the problem on my alternate hardware, its > still the same particular disk which can't disprove that it's simply a > single defective piece - the only thing stuck in my mind is Win7rc working > fine so far while various other Linux distros have exhibited the same problem. .. The errors in that log indicate bad media. So the question is, can you demonstrate Win7rc NOT having the same errors when accessing the SAME (logical) sectors ? -ml