From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263301AbVCDXwf (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 18:52:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263315AbVCDXth (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 18:49:37 -0500 Received: from bender.bawue.de ([193.7.176.20]:39558 "EHLO bender.bawue.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263089AbVCDWc1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 17:32:27 -0500 Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 23:32:22 +0100 From: Joerg Sommrey To: Jeff Garzik , Linux kernel mailing list Subject: Re: [SATA] libata-dev queue updated Message-ID: <20050304223222.GA10815@sommrey.de> Mail-Followup-To: Joerg Sommrey , Jeff Garzik , Linux kernel mailing list References: <422641AF.8070309@pobox.com> <20050303193229.GA10265@sommrey.de> <4227DF76.3030401@pobox.com> <20050304063717.GA12203@sommrey.de> <422809D6.5090909@pobox.com> <20050304174956.GA10971@sommrey.de> <4228A3D4.8050906@pobox.com> <20050304203330.GA14557@sommrey.de> <4228C87A.8080205@pobox.com> <20050304220623.GA11867@sommrey.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050304220623.GA11867@sommrey.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 11:06:23PM +0100, Joerg Sommrey wrote: > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:43:38PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Joerg Sommrey wrote: > > >On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:07:16PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > > > >>Joerg Sommrey wrote: > > >> > > >>>On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:10:14AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>>Joerg Sommrey wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>>On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 11:09:26PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>>>Joerg Sommrey wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 05:43:59PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>Joerg Sommrey wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>Jeff Garzik wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>Patch: > > >>>>>>>>>>http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/jgarzik/libata/2.6.11-rc5-bk4-libata-dev1.patch.bz2 > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>Still not usable here. The same errors as before when backing up: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>Please try 2.6.11 without any patches. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>Plain 2.6.11 doesn't work either. All of 2.6.10-ac11, 2.6.11-rc5, > > >>>>>>>2.6.11-rc5 + 2.6.11-rc5-bk4-libata-dev1.patch and 2.6.11 fail with > > >>>>>>>the > > >>>>>>>same symptoms. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>Reverting to stable 2.6.10-ac8 :-) > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>Does reverting the attached patch in 2.6.11 (apply with patch -R) fix > > >>>>>>things? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>>Still the same with this patch reverted. > > >>>> > > >>>>Does reverting the attached patch in 2.6.11 fix things? (apply with > > >>>>patch -R) > > >>>> > > >>>>This patch reverts the entire libata back to 2.6.10. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>>I'm confused. Still the same with everything reverted. What shall I do > > >>>now? > > >> > > >>Well, first, thanks for your patience in narrowing this down. > > >> > > >>This means we have eliminated libata as a problem source, but we still > > >>have the rest of the kernel go to through :) > > >> > > >>Try disabling ACPI with 'acpi=off' or 'pci=biosirq' to see if that fixes > > >>things. > > >> > > > > > >I tried both settings with plain 2.6.11. Almost the same results, in my > > >impression apci=off causes the failure to appear even faster. > > > > Just to make sure I have things right, please tell me if this is correct: > > > > * 2.6.10 vanilla works > > > > * 2.6.11 vanilla does not work > > > > * 2.6.11 vanilla + 2.6.10 libata does not work > > [2.6.10 libata == reverting all libata changes] > > > > Is that all correct? > > Thanks for asking these precise questions. After double-checking > everything I found a typo in my configuration that changes things a bit. > I repeated some tests and the correct answers are now: > * 2.6.10 vanilla works > * 2.6.10-ac8 works > * 2.6.10-ac11 does not work > * 2.6.11 vanilla does not work > * 2.6.11 w/o promise.patch does not work > * 2.6.11 + 2.6.10 libata works! > > This looks much more consistent to me but brings the case back to > libata. After one more test using 2.6.11 + 2.6.10 libata I got some errors. They are different, they end after some time and they don't lock the system: Mar 4 23:15:00 bear kernel: ata1: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error }Mar 4 23:15:00 bear kernel: sdb: Current: sense key: Recovered Error Mar 4 23:15:00 bear kernel: ASC=0x26 <> ASCQ=0xc0 Mar 4 23:15:00 bear kernel: FMK, ILI Got 1900 of these in 90 seconds and silence afterwards. Maybe that helps. I'll keep this kernel running and watch it. -jo -- -rw-r--r-- 1 jo users 63 2005-03-04 23:12 /home/jo/.signature