Bob Stewart wrote: > --- Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> The driver is seriously broken regarding LBA48 support. The timeout >> goes away if max_sectors is decreased to ATA_MAX_SECTORS - 1, doh. But >> both the reading and writing are seriously broken. I can't tell whether >> they end up in the wrong sectors or garbage is transferred to/from the >> right sectors. > > I couldn't figure it out, either. There were some times early on that I > failed it all the way down to PIO4 and it worked just fine. But, with DMA > forget it. Hmmm... I played a bit with POLLING LBA48 but no luck. I always got HSM violation. >> I'm really close to marking this device broken or we'll need to >> implement a mechanism to veto LBA48 device from LLD (may be negative >> return from ->dev_config). > > Are you sure it's an LBA48 issue? I was never sure how to check > this but in my banging around, I never saw anything in the HOB fields. Pretty sure. If I write sequentially, the first sector out of LBA28 range gives me timeout (with 256 sector requests). If I make a filesystem insider LBA28 range proper, I can fsck it using another controller and vice versa but if I do it outside of LBA48 range (using 255 sector requests), nothing gets written or read properly. >> Reading the sunix driver, I can't find any relevant workaround. It >> never seems to initialize ctl address. I'm curious whether the sunix >> driver can do LBA48. Bob, are you interested in testing this? > > Sure. I'll need to reorganize hardware again, but it'll give me something > to do till the steelhead start their spring run. :) Have no idea what the steelhead is but thanks. :-) -- tejun - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
