Am Freitag, 9. Januar 2009 schrieb Alan Cox: > On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:34:55 +0100 > Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > with todays git I lots of these warnings: > > > > [ 1.246807] ata1.00: ATA-7: ST910021AS, 4.06, max UDMA/100 > > [ 1.253066] ata1.00: 195371568 sectors, multi 16: LBA48 > > [ 1.262561] ata2.00: ATAPI: HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-U10N, 1.05, max UDMA/33 > > [ 1.273159] ata1.00: configured for UDMA/100 > > [ 1.275279] ata2.00: configured for UDMA/33 > > [ 1.285546] scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access ATA ST910021AS 4.06 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5 > > [ 1.292049] sd 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0 > > [ 1.298427] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 195371568 512-byte hardware sectors: (100 GB/93.1 GiB) > > [ 1.299631] scsi 1:0:0:0: CD-ROM HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-U10N 1.05 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5 > > [ 1.311059] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off > > [ 1.317409] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00 > > [ 1.317426] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA > > [ 1.318378] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > > [ 1.318380] WARNING: at drivers/ata/libata-sff.c:1017 ata_sff_hsm_move+0x45e/0x750() > > [ 1.318381] Hardware name: 64575GG > > Can you see if this goes away if you back out all Arjan's async stuff. > Then if not can you back out my 32bit PIO patch and see if that is the > trigger. > > Alan Sure. Since I could not revert arjans patches without conflicts, I started checking out older versions. My first try was e427fe042cf90c0652eed9a85e57a8fd8af89890 (without PIO, with async patched) was successful. The problem went away. So it was triggered by the 32bit PIO patch. Do you still need a test result without the async patches? Christian -- 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
