[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 11:39:17 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Kuan Luo <kluo@...dia.com>, hancockr@...w.ca,
Peer Chen <pchen@...dia.com>, Allen Martin <AMartin@...dia.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Disabling ADMA? (was Re: [PATCH] drivers/ata: Add the SW NCQ support
to sata_nv for MCP51/MCP55/MCP61)
Kuan Luo wrote:
> @@ -1714,3 +2761,6 @@ module_init(nv_init);
> module_exit(nv_exit);
> module_param_named(adma, adma_enabled, bool, 0444);
> MODULE_PARM_DESC(adma, "Enable use of ADMA (Default: true)");
> +module_param_named(ncq, ncq_enabled, bool, 0444);
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(ncq, "Enable use of NCQ (Default: false)");
After looking through sata_nv bug reports, I am leaning towards
disabling ADMA by default, and wanted to solicit comments.
While admittedly not knowing the root cause, it seems like every current
outstanding sata_nv bug report that remains after switching out hardware
can be solved by setting module option 'adma' to zero. That's my first
suggestion upon any bugzilla sata_nv bug, and it usually works. You can
look through bugs assigned to or CC'd to jgarzik@...ox.com (kernel.org
bugs) jgarzik@...hat.com (redhat.com bugs) for examples.
I still need to review the SWNCQ patch in detail, but I presume it is
possible to still use SWNCQ without ADMA?
On a side note, I would rather default SWNCQ to 'on'.
Jeff
-
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