[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4697D425.7000300@rtr.ca>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:36:05 -0400
From: Mark Lord <liml@....ca>
To: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <ssouhlal@...ebsd.org>,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Make the IDE DMA timeout modifiable
Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Mark Lord wrote:
>
>>> O> >> BTW, why the timeout is so damn long? 2*WAIT_CMD is 20 secs,
>>> and if DMA is not complete or interrupt pending, it may wait 10 more secs...
..
>> I've lost the original question from this thread, but the idea of the
>
> The original question concerned specifically the DMA command timeout
> which is twice more than the usual one, WAIT_CMD (10 seconds).
>
>> longish
>> timeouts was that drive *may* be spun down ("standby"), and thus have
>> to spin
>> up again to complete media commands. Back then, drives were much
>> slower at
>> spinning up than nowadays, and the ATA spec says to allow up to 30
>> seconds.
>
> Well, that doesn't explain the DMA case.
When a drive is in standby, we don't send it anything special to wake up.
So even DMA commands have to have a long enough timeout to allow
for spinning up.
Cheers
-
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