Tejun & Robert, just a friendly reminder for an email/issue below. On Thursday 09 August 2018 13:48:52 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Thursday 10 May 2018 15:51:57 Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Tuesday 04 August 2015 20:06:57 Pali Rohár wrote: > > > On Monday 03 August 2015 05:02:15 Robert Hancock wrote: > > > > On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 3:08 AM, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > wrote: > > > > > On Sunday 02 August 2015 03:45:32 Robert Hancock wrote: > > > > >> On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > On Thursday 25 December 2014 07:22:13 Robert Hancock wrote: > > > > >> >> On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Pali Rohár > > > > >> >> <pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> wrote: > > > > >> >> > Hello, > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > I have nvidia nforce4 motherboard with nvidia sata > > > > >> >> > controller: > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > 00:07.0 IDE interface [0101]: NVIDIA Corporation CK804 Serial > > > > >> >> > ATA Controller [10de:0054] (rev f3) > > > > >> >> > 00:08.0 IDE interface [0101]: NVIDIA Corporation CK804 Serial > > > > >> >> > ATA Controller [10de:0055] (rev f3) > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > I manually enabled adma mode (which is disabled by default) > > > > >> >> > by adding sata_nv.adma=1 to grub cmdline. In git history I > > > > >> >> > found that enabling adma mode includes NCQ support and > > > > >> >> > reduced CPU overhead. It looks like adma mode is working, > > > > >> >> > but at every boot I see one same error message in dmesg: > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > [ 16.823514] ata1.00: exception Emask 0x1 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 > > > > >> >> > action 0x0 > > > > >> >> > [ 16.823520] ata1.00: CPB resp_flags 0x11: , CMD error > > > > >> >> > [ 16.823524] ata1.00: failed command: SET FEATURES > > > > >> >> > [ 16.823530] ata1.00: cmd > > > > >> >> > ef/05:fe:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/40 tag 16 > > > > >> >> > [ 16.823530] res > > > > >> >> > 51/04:fe:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/40 Emask 0x1 (device error) > > > > >> >> > [ 16.823533] ata1.00: status: { DRDY ERR } > > > > >> >> > [ 16.823535] ata1.00: error: { ABRT } > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > When adma is disabled then this error message is not > > > > >> >> > generated. > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> It looks like something is trying to issue a command to disable > > > > >> >> APM power management on the drive, and the command fails > > > > >> >> (likely because it doesn't support that command). I'm not sure > > > > >> >> where that would be coming from - I'm pretty sure the kernel > > > > >> >> doesn't issue that command itself. Something that's part of > > > > >> >> your distro perhaps? > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> I don't know why it would only be failing in ADMA mode either, > > > > >> >> though depending on where the command is coming from, maybe > > > > >> >> it's not being issued otherwise for some reason? > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > What does that error message means? It is critical? What is > > > > >> >> > that command SET FEATURES doing? Are there any problems with > > > > >> >> > adma mode on nforce4 motherboards? Because I did not see any > > > > >> >> > problems (except that one error message). > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > -- > > > > >> >> > Pali Rohár > > > > >> >> > pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Hello, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > now after long time I did more investigation and that error is > > > > >> > reported for every connected HDD. I identified that it comes > > > > >> > from udev script > > > > >> > > > > > >> > /lib/udev/rules.d/85-hdparm.rules > > > > >> > > > > > >> > which just call script /lib/udev/hdparm for every one connected > > > > >> > HDD. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Script /lib/udev/hdparm just call: > > > > >> > /sbin/hdparm -B254 $DRIVE > > > > >> > > > > > >> > And that -B254 cause above error message in dmesg log. Output > > > > >> > from > > > > >> > > > > > >> > hdparm is: > > > > >> > /dev/sda: > > > > >> > setting Advanced Power Management level to 0xfe (254) > > > > >> > APM_level = not supported > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Any idea why in ADMA mode it cause above error (APM unsupported) > > > > >> > and in non ADMA mode it is working fine? Maybe APM ATA commands > > > > >> > should not be sent via ADMA? > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Here is another output: > > > > >> > $ sudo hdparm -I /dev/sda | grep -i power > > > > >> > > > > > >> > * Power Management feature set > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Power-Up In Standby feature set > > > > >> > > > > > >> > * SET_FEATURES required to spinup after power up > > > > >> > * Host-initiated interface power management > > > > >> > > > > >> The "set features" command is a non-data command so based on our > > > > >> current knowledge, it should work in ADMA mode. However, these > > > > >> NVIDIA SATAs are black boxes, and rather buggy ones at that, so > > > > >> it's possible there's an unknown issue there. > > > > > > > > > > Maybe I should note that hdparm -I did not generated any error > > > > > message. I post is here because it show "Power Management feature > > > > > set" is supported by HDD. This indicate that HDD supports -B (APM) > > > > > command, right? > > > > > > > > As far as I know, yes. > > > > > > > > >> The easiest way to test that would be to take out the condition > > > > >> check for qc->tf.protocol == ATA_PROT_NODATA in > > > > >> nv_adma_use_reg_mode in drivers/ata/sata_nv.c. That would force > > > > >> it to disable ADMA for all non-data commands. > > > > > > > > > > Ok, as now I have just SSH access to that machine, I will do kernel > > > > > patching later (when I have physical access to it). > > > > > > > > > >> I really don't know why Ubuntu is disabling APM on all drives on > > > > >> bootup however. Especially for laptops, that seems like a silly > > > > >> thing to do explicitly. Sounds like one of the silly things > > > > >> Ubuntu is known to do without consulting people. > > > > > > > > > > Looks like this comes from upstream udev/systemd project :-( > > > > > Anyway, for laptops on battery ubuntu has another set of scripts > > > > > which turn on APM (based on connected/disconnected AC adapter). > > > > > > > > There's no such scripts in Fedora, so either they removed it, or it's > > > > something that either Debian or Ubuntu has added in. > > > > > > > > > That udev script which turn off APM is called when any disk is > > > > > attached to system (so at boot time it is called for every one > > > > > disk). > > > > > > > > > > Now I just masked that udev script and it is no longer called... > > > > > > > > > > Anyway if I call hdparm -B /dev/sda I get output: > > > > > > > > > > APM_level = not supported > > > > > > > > > > And important is that there is no error message in dmesg. I get it > > > > > only if I call hdparm -B with parameter (set option). But APM > > > > > should be supported, right? > > > > > > > > Does the get command work without ADMA enabled? > > > > > > I requested to boot that machine with turned off ADMA. I verified it is > > > turned off as I found sata_nv.adma=0 in /proc/cmdline and file > > > /sys/module/sata_nv/parameters/adma contains big N. > > > > > > I called hdparm: > > > > > > $ sudo hdparm -B254 /dev/sda > > > > > > /dev/sda: > > > setting Advanced Power Management level to 0xfe (254) > > > HDIO_DRIVE_CMD failed: Input/output error > > > APM_level = not supported > > > > > > It failed, but I do not see any error message in dmesg. There is nothing > > > new in dmesg. > > > > > > So looks like I'm not able to set APM... But why in ADMA mode it > > > generates some error and in non ADMA mode no error? Strange! > > > > > > > Hi Robert! > > > > After long time I tested it again. I have there two SATA disks connected > > to that computer. Running hdparm -B (without number) just print "not > > supported" and hdparm -B254 still cause above kernel dmesg error. > > > > But second disk print via hdparm -B current APM level and via -B<num> I > > can set a new APM level. And it does not print any error (nor in dmesg > > or on stdout). > > > > Therefore first disk probably does not support APM and above kernel > > dmesg error is caused only when I'm trying to set APM level on disk > > without APM support. > > > > So... is not this problem in kernel libata or sata_nv modules which > > parses error messages for unsupported operations? > > Tejun, you are libata maintainer, can you look or check if this is a > problem in kernel's libata? I guess that this is problem in propagating > APM errors. At least disk without APM support should not cause such > errors... > -- Pali Rohár pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature