| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <E1LzLgA-0004j6-9W@closure.thunk.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 22:07:14 -0400
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: No NCQ support on X61s Ultrabay? (Intel ICH8 SATA controller question)
I was taking a look at why I can't get NCQ working on the Ultrabay drive
on the X61s Thinkpad (which is a big deal if you're using the X25-M
SSD):
[ 4563.614247] ata4.00: 390721968 sectors, multi 16: LBA48 NCQ (depth 0/32)
^^^^^^^
which as near as I can tell is because ATA_FLAG_NCQ isn't set in struct
ata_port->flag. This looks like it should be set to ata_piix.c if the
controller supports NCQ --- but ata_piix.c doesn't set ATA_FLAG_NCQ at
all. However, this web page:
http://www.intel.com/support/chipsets/imst/sb/CS-012304.htm
Seems to imply the 82801HBM/HEM SATA controller from the ICH8M/ICHM8-E
supports AHCI and NCQ, and this is the controller which is in the X61s
laptop.
So I wonder if it's safe to simply add ATA_FLAG_NCQ to ata_piix.c or
not? Can someone who's more familiar with Intel's ICH8 SATA controller
comment on whether this would be a safe thing to do?
Thanks,
- Ted
--
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