linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.32.2 SATA link detect failed, 2.6.32.1 works fine

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:02:07 +0800 (CST)
From:	fengxiangjun <fengxiangjun@...soft.com>
To:	Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.32.2 SATA link detect failed, 2.6.32.1 works fine


You are right, it's definitely timing related.

I just tried capturing the failed booting message through a null modem 
cable, but the problem goes away! It seems that I can't reproduce it 
with serial console attached.

dmesg attached. 

On Mon, 21 Dec 2009, Robert Hancock wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 7:02 PM, fengxiangjun <fengxiangjun@...soft.com> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, running 2.6.32.1 now, no problem.
> >
> > dmesg shows:
> >
> > ata1.00: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300)
> >
> > When booting 2.6.32.2 with the same config, I get
> >
> > ata1.00: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 301)
> >
> > Weird.
> 
> CCing linux-ide and Tejun. Could be some kind of timing difference
> triggering the problem, perhaps?
> 
> >
> > On Mon, 21 Dec 2009, Robert Hancock wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/21/2009 05:12 AM, fengxiangjun wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > after upgrading to 2.6.32.2,
> >> > with the attached config,
> >> > kernel booting always(just tried 10+ times) failed at:
> >> >
> >> > ata1.00: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 301)
> >> > ...
> >> > VFS: Cannot open root device ...
> >>
> >> There were no libata changes in 2.6.32.2 that should have affected this. Are
> >> you sure the .config is unchanged? Have you rechecked that 2.6.31.1 still
> >> works?
> >>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachment(s)
> > is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be confidential and/or privileged of
> > Neusoft Corporation, its subsidiaries and/or its affiliates. If any reader of this communication is
> > not the intended recipient, unauthorized use, forwarding, printing,  storing, disclosure or copying
> > is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful.If you have received this communication in error,please
> > immediately notify the sender by return e-mail, and delete the original message and all copies from
> > your system. Thank you.
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying attachment(s) 
is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be confidential and/or privileged of 
Neusoft Corporation, its subsidiaries and/or its affiliates. If any reader of this communication is 
not the intended recipient, unauthorized use, forwarding, printing,  storing, disclosure or copying 
is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful.If you have received this communication in error,please 
immediately notify the sender by return e-mail, and delete the original message and all copies from 
your system. Thank you. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

View attachment "dmesg.2.6.32.2" of type "TEXT/PLAIN" (18191 bytes)