Hi,
> Is the culprit REQ_TYPE_BLOCK_PC request or REQ_TYPE_ATA_PC one?
Well, from what I see from the latest traces Valerio sent me, it is always a
REQ_TYPE_BLOCK_PC with sizes for rq->data_len which fail in the alignment test:
rq->data_len: 0xc,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
rq->data_len: 0xf810,
Those are, according to Valerio, taken during burning which looks like something
aroung 64K requests which fail the rq->data_len & alignment test where alignment
is 0x1f. The would've passed the old test rq->data_len & 0xf.
/me researching DMA alignment requirements...
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
--
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
