[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090216152111.GA31403@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:21:11 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Justin Madru <jdm64@...ab.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux IDE <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>
Subject: Re: [Bug #12263] Sata soft reset filling log
* Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
>>>>>> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
>>>>>> of regressions introduced between 2.6.27 and 2.6.28.
>
>>>>>> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
>>>>>> introduced between 2.6.27 and 2.6.28. Please verify if it still should
>>>>>> be listed and let me know (either way).
>
>>>>>> Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12263
>>>>>> Subject : Sata soft reset filling log
>>>>>> Submitter : Justin Madru <bevicm@...extreme.com>
>>>>>> Date : 2008-12-13 2:07 (64 days old)
>>>>>> References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122913412608533&w=4
>
>>>>> I'm still seeing this on .29-rc5, and I think that my bug #12263
>>>>> is a duplicate of bug #12609,
>>>>> or more correctly it's a duplicate of mine because I reported first.
>
>>>>> It seems like the bug has been fixed in tip/master for some time now.
>>>>> Below is the diff of origin and tip from when I tested.
>
>>>> Ingo, do you know whinch patch in -tip fixes this regression?
>
>>> This one, done on Jan 10, more than a month ago:
>
>>> f1d26da: Revert "libata: Add 32bit PIO support"
>
>>> When a commit causes trouble in -tip qa i immediately revert it in
>>> 95% of the cases, no questions asked. Especially if it's related to
>>> persistent storage.
>
>> OK, thanks.
>
>> We seem to have a working fix patch for this issue in bug #12609.
>
> Wait, if this is indeed post-2.6.27 regression, it couldn't possibly
> have been caused by that patch which got merged during 2.6.29-rc1
> timeframe. Something's up with this bug...
SATA uses the SCSI layer, right? It could then perhaps be these bits in
tip:out-of-tree:
813104e: Revert "[SCSI] simplify scsi_io_completion()"
84db545: Revert "[SCSI] Fix uninitialized variable error in scsi_io_completion"
0eb6038: Revert "[SCSI] Fix error handling for DIF/DIX"
3cd94dd: Revert "[SCSI] scsi_lib: don't decrement busy counters when inserting commands"
c27aed5: Revert "[SCSI] scsi_lib: fix DID_RESET status problems"
i needed these to keep an aic7xxx box from crashing. This regression got
introduced at around 2.6.28-rc1, so it fits the timeframe.
Ingo
--
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