On 08/03/06 00:07, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Robert Annessi wrote: > >> BUG: warning at drivers/scsi/dc395x.c:2329/data_in_phase0() >> [<f884c768>] data_in_phase0+0x190/0x244 [dc395x] >> [<f884c15e>] dc395x_handle_interrupt+0xf7/0x128 [dc395x] >> [<f884c1c0>] dc395x_interrupt+0x31/0x5f [dc395x] >> [<c0137975>] handle_IRQ_event+0x21/0x49 >> [<c0137a2e>] __do_IRQ+0x91/0xef >> [<c0104a2f>] do_IRQ+0x43/0x50 >> [<c01032aa>] common_interrupt+0x1a/0x20 > > Would be interesting to find out what exactly causes these warnings. Could > you, please, try the patch at the bottom of this email with 2.6.18-rc3 and > see if the message it prints appears in dmesg - together with the NO_TAGQ > warkaround and without safe=1. dc395x: Tekram DC395(U/UW/F), DC315(U) - ASIC TRM-S1040 v2.05, 2004/03/08 PCI: setting IRQ 11 as level-triggered PCI: Found IRQ 11 for device 0000:00:02.0 dc395x: Used settings: AdapterID=07, Speed=0(20.0MHz), dev_mode=0x37 dc395x: AdaptMode=0x4e, Tags=0(01), DelayReset=1s dc395x: (Wide) Connectors: int68 Termination: Auto Low High dc395x: Performing initial SCSI bus reset scsi0 : Tekram DC395(U/UW/F), DC315(U) - ASIC TRM-S1040 v2.05, 2004/03/08 dc395x: Target 00: Wide16 Sync: 48ns Offset 15 (41.7 MB/s) Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST3146807LC Rev: 0007 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 03 SCSI device sda: 286749488 512-byte hdwr sectors (146816 MB) dc395x: inconsistent counters: FIFOCNT 64, left 16777215, wide sda: Write Protect is off sda: Mode Sense: ab 00 10 08 dc395x: inconsistent counters: FIFOCNT 64, left 16777215, wide SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back w/ FUA SCSI device sda: 286749488 512-byte hdwr sectors (146816 MB) dc395x: inconsistent counters: FIFOCNT 64, left 16777215, wide sda: Write Protect is off sda: Mode Sense: ab 00 10 08 dc395x: inconsistent counters: FIFOCNT 64, left 16777215, wide SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back w/ FUA sda: unknown partition table sd 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi disk sda > Well, this looks much better to me. So, I think, we may say for you the > problem is solved. Globally, I think, the reason why other drivers have no For me the problem is definetely solved. Thank you! > problems with this drive is because they are using results of the generic > inquiry evaluation code, and it chooses better communication parameters > than the dc395x. Would be nice to switch dc395x to do that too. Unfortunately I don't have the skills for that - as you probably already noticed. (; Hopefully someone else is willing to adapt the driver. Regards, Robert
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
