Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently

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

To: Mark Lord <liml@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
From: Artem Bokhan <aptem@xxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 19:58:47 +0700
Cc: Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-ide@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <48A427C0.1070500@xxxxxx>
List-id: <linux-ide.vger.kernel.org>
References: <489C19CE.6030708@xxxxxx> <489C4B6E.9070306@xxxxxx> <489C4F29.6020007@xxxxxx> <489C54D1.5080901@xxxxxx> <48A29E14.3090908@xxxxxxxxx> <48A2BBDC.2090201@xxxxxx> <48A2BC5D.5060801@xxxxxxxxx> <48A2C35C.7020400@xxxxxx> <48A2C460.6040504@xxxxxxxxx> <48A2C770.2040200@xxxxxx> <48A2CB1B.4000200@xxxxxxxxx> <48A2CE09.9090806@xxxxxx> <48A30920.5030803@xxxxxx> <48A33CDC.3000809@xxxxxx> <48A36FE5.5000706@xxxxxx> <48A3E1FF.4030502@xxxxxx> <48A427C0.1070500@xxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.14pre (X11/20071022)

That work, thanks, no retries at all now. But is behavior with readaheadon and double reads correct?


Mark Lord пишет:

Artem Bokhan wrote:
..

IMHO, looks like cavity somewhere... Any ideas?

..

Have you tried to disable fs read-ahead?

Something like "hdparm -a0 /dev/sd*" ?

-ml


--
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

References:
- bad sectors, suspicious behaviour
  - From: Artem Bokhan
- Re: bad sectors, suspicious behaviour
  - From: Mark Lord
- Re: bad sectors, suspicious behaviour
  - From: Mark Lord
- Re: bad sectors, suspicious behaviour
  - From: Mark Lord
- Re: bad sectors, suspicious behaviour
  - From: Tejun Heo
- Re: bad sectors, suspicious behaviour
  - From: Artem Bokhan
- Re: bad sectors, suspicious behaviour
  - From: Tejun Heo
- Re: bad sectors, suspicious behaviour
  - From: Artem Bokhan
- [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
  - From: Tejun Heo
- Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
  - From: Artem Bokhan
- Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
  - From: Tejun Heo
- Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
  - From: Artem Bokhan
- Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
  - From: Mark Lord
- Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
  - From: Bokhan Artem
- Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
  - From: Mark Lord
- Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
  - From: Artem Bokhan
- Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
  - From: Mark Lord

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_mv: don't issue two DMA commands concurrently
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]