Re: libata fails to recover from HSM violation involving DRQ status

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Mark Lord wrote:
..
I triggered this by accident, issuing an IDENTIFY command
which incorrectly specified ATA_PROT_NODATA.  My error, for sure,
but libata never recovered from the "stuck DRQ bit" that resulted.
...
sda: Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
SCSI device sda: write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
ata1.00: cmd ec/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0 cdb 0x0 data 0 res 58/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask 0x2 (HSM violation)
ata1: soft resetting port
ata1.00: configured for UDMA/100
ata1: EH complete
SCSI device sda: 312581808 512-byte hdwr sectors (160042 MB)
sda: Write Protect is off
sda: Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
SCSI device sda: write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
ata1.00: cmd ec/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0 cdb 0x0 data 0 res 58/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask 0x2 (HSM violation)
ata1: soft resetting port
ata1.00: configured for UDMA/100
ata1: EH complete
...
(over and over)

Say.. is this problem as simple as excessive retries for an SG_IO command?
There shouldn't really be *any* retries here, and it should eventually
just fail the command rather than shut down the port.

Or am I just reading the logs wrong?
-
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux RAID]     [Git]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Newbie]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux