Hi, I have compiled my own 2.6.23 kernel for a friend, and worried to find out that his SATA disk reports the shutdown warning: http://linux-ata.org/shutdown.html I've digged into Debian's sysvinit 2.86.1 src and I got confused: 1) Like Scott James Remnant, Ubuntu's Development Manager (http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-ide@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg06595.html) said, in Debian (actually he referred to Ubuntu, but looking at the code they make the same thing) shutdown iterates through all /dev/hd* files and shuts them down. So, if I'm right, sda (the node file for my friend's PC) is leaved untouch. Why is the warning appearing then? It is supposed that SATA drives not using the /dev/hd* convention shouldn't be stopped by shutdown. 2) The kernel Flushes cache and puts in stand-by-now since 2.6.22 This can cause (if it was already stopped) the disk to spin up and then down. So.... anyway the disk should spun down propperly before power down, it might be done twice, but none of them would be an emergency shut down. I think I'm missing something... or otherwise there is no problem at all 3) What's the proposed solution after all??? Shutdown should flush cache AND stop the SATA? or shutdown shouldn't do anything? You seem to be in favor of "not doing anything" but I'm also concerned that Kernel's prior to 2.6.22 would be negative affected by this solution. 4) What everyone in forums is asking... are they SATA drives being forced from long time ago, and they have just found out by using the new kernel? That remains unclear. 5) At least on my friend's SATA, the "clack" sounds like 2 or 3 seconds before power downs, but it sounds slightly (and really slightly) different to the Window's shutdown "clack". Does this means that his drive is safe? Or is it possible for software to power down just the HDD without stopping the heads??? 5b)I've compiled the kernel without the "Asynchronous SCSI scanning" flag (SCSI_SCAN_ASYNC). Does it have something to do that the kernel seems to be waiting for the SCSI to stop before powering down? 6) If I'm not mistaken, in hdddown.c (debian's sysvinit code http://packages.debian.org/etch/sysvinit) in line 67 we should change static int do_standby_idedisk(char *device) { #ifndef WIN_STANDBYNOW1 #define WIN_STANDBYNOW1 0xE0 #endif #ifndef WIN_STANDBYNOW2 #define WIN_STANDBYNOW2 0x94 #endif unsigned char args1[4] = {WIN_STANDBYNOW1,0,0,0}; unsigned char args2[4] = {WIN_STANDBYNOW2,0,0,0}; int fd; if ((fd = open(device, O_RDWR)) < 0) return -1; if (ioctl(fd, HDIO_DRIVE_CMD, &args1) && ioctl(fd, HDIO_DRIVE_CMD, &args2)) return -1; return 0; } By: static int do_standby_idedisk(char *device) { #ifndef WIN_STANDBYNOW1 #define WIN_STANDBYNOW1 0xE0 #endif #ifndef WIN_STANDBYNOW2 #define WIN_STANDBYNOW2 0x94 #endif #ifndef WIN_FLUSHCACHE #define WIN_FLUSHCACHE 0xE7 #endif unsigned char args0[4] = {WIN_FLUSHCACHE,0,0,0}; unsigned char args1[4] = {WIN_STANDBYNOW1,0,0,0}; unsigned char args2[4] = {WIN_STANDBYNOW2,0,0,0}; int fd; if ((fd = open(device, O_RDWR)) < 0) return -1; if (ioctl(fd, HDIO_DRIVE_CMD, &args0) && ioctl(fd, HDIO_DRIVE_CMD, &args1) && ioctl(fd, HDIO_DRIVE_CMD, &args2)) return -1; return 0; } Right? Am I missing something? This email is long but I take HDD potential issues very seriously. Thanks Dark Sylinc PS: I'm not a distro mantainer. But I'm concerned about my friend's SATA, and if we can get to a solution, I would be glad to report the patch to the Debian Community Los referentes más importantes en compra/ venta de autos se juntaron: Demotores y Yahoo! Ahora comprar o vender tu auto es más fácil. Vistá ar.autos.yahoo.com/ - 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
