lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 20:49:15 -0600 From: Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca> To: Linda Walsh <lkml@...nx.org> Cc: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Believed resolved: SATA kern-buffRd read slow: based on promise driver bug Linda Walsh wrote: > I seem to remember reading about some problems with Promise SATA & ACPI. > Does this address that or is that a separate issue? (Am using no-acpi for > now, but would like to try acpi again if it may be fixed (last time I tried > it with this card, "sdb" went "offline" (once it unmounted itself and > refused to be remounted (no error...just nothing), and another it stayed > mounted, but gave an I/O Error...so have been using no-acpi since). > An ACPI error in bootup said: > ACPI Exception (utmutex-0263): AE_BAD_PARAMETER, Thread EFFC2000 could > not acquire Mutex [3] [20070126] Have you tried 2.6.24-rc6? If the problem still occurs there, you should post the full bootup log. > > Is the above bug mentioned/discussed in the linux-ide archives? That > and I'd like to find out why TCQ/NCQ doesn't work with the Seagate > drives -- > my guess, since they say queuedepth of 0/32, is that they are blacklisted > as being drives that don't follow normal protocol or implement their > own proprietary extensions? Sigh. Really a lame move (if that's the case) > for Seagate, considering they usage they could likely get in server > configs. Maybe they want to push their SCSI/SAS drives? Queue depth 0/32 means the drive supports a queue depth of 32 but the controller/driver don't support NCQ. > BTW, can SATA have DPO or FUA or are those limited to SCSI? > Would it be a desirable future addition to remove the > "doesn't support DPO or FUA" error message" on SATA drives if they are > specific to SCSI? ATA disks can have FUA support, but the support is disabled in libata by default. (There's a fua parameter on libata module to enable it I believe.) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists