Ryan Power wrote:
Here's the section with the modifications you requested:
..
The same section with "if (err_mask && id[2] != 0x738c)" in place of the
previous modification:
[ 2.216000] scsi0 : sata_sil
[ 2.216000] scsi1 : sata_sil
[ 2.216000] ata1: SATA max UDMA/100 cmd 0xf880c080 ctl 0xf880c08a
bmdma 0xf880c000 irq 16
[ 2.216000] ata2: SATA max UDMA/100 cmd 0xf880c0c0 ctl 0xf880c0ca
bmdma 0xf880c008 irq 16
[ 2.684000] ata1: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 310)
[ 2.692000] ata1.00: ATA-7: Maxtor 6L320S0, BACE1G20, max UDMA/133
[ 2.692000] ata1.00: 625142448 sectors, multi 16: LBA48 NCQ (depth 0/32)
[ 2.708000] ata1.00: configured for UDMA/100
[ 3.176000] ata2: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 310)
[ 10.944000] id[2]=0x37c8
Okay, above we can see the drive requires a spin-up command,
which now gets issued, and then we loop to retry the IDENTIFY.
[ 10.964000] ata2.00: ATA-7: WDC WD3200JS-57PDB0, 21.00M21, max UDMA/133
[ 10.964000] ata2.00: 625142448 sectors, multi 0: LBA48 NCQ (depth 0/1)
[ 10.972000] id[2]=0x738c
[ 10.972000] ata2.00: configured for UDMA/100
There we can see that, after the spin-up command, the IDENTIFY succeeds,
and the new signature value of 0x728c indicates that full IDENTIFY data
is now present. So we can just continue at that point.
Good!
Now.. time to get your name in lights and all that!
Would you like to package up that new if-stmt (below)
as a nice and proper kernel patch? Just follow the advice
in the SubmittingPatches file, or model things after other
patches you've seen here, and post the result with a
proper Signed-Off-By line, and I'll ack it.
if (err_mask && id[2] != 0x738c)
Or leave it to me, and I'll steal your fame and fortune! :)
Cheers
Thanks Ryan!
-
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
