From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755875AbZERGac (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 May 2009 02:30:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755075AbZERGaP (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 May 2009 02:30:15 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f222.google.com ([209.85.218.222]:41981 "EHLO mail-bw0-f222.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755011AbZERGaN (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 May 2009 02:30:13 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; b=oroPydlnHFRv94/GK78H+CFFnnRpVc9imS3A6AFJHWnJBpEnbTxV8UD6VZsv1D3uN9 CcN0dLhMzB9ypcIgPMCXG/f5ImOPf8DZpM9BzZnIcO1TLnmkzX6I2QvEwPagc/jWYl8N 4W+Z3qMg+ifYPxPjrKjA9Bwc4zqaFz+pICfG0= Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 08:30:07 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Jonathan Woithe Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo Subject: Re: 2.9.29.2: ide-tape: panic when probing device at boot Message-ID: <20090518063007.GA7818@liondog.tnic> Mail-Followup-To: Borislav Petkov , Jonathan Woithe , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo References: <20090509161801.GB5749@liondog.tnic> <200905180532.n4I5Wxa1031243@turbo.physics.adelaide.edu.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200905180532.n4I5Wxa1031243@turbo.physics.adelaide.edu.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 03:02:59PM +0930, Jonathan Woithe wrote: > > On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 05:57:49PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > > > > [ cc:ing linux-ide and knowledgeable people ] > > > > > > Borislav/Tejun: > > > Is the 2.6.29 problem the same thing that was fixed recently? > > > > I'll let Tejun answer that one since I don't get an oops. However, now > > that I have an ide-tape hardware here, I do get something DMA-related > > failing during boot ... > > : > > and more specifically the bad DMA info in identify block thing above. I > > haven't looked into it yet but its next on my TODO. > > Cool. > > > > Should I just push commit 1e75540ec5202cae63cd238c86bd880e3d496546 > > > ("ide-tape: remove back-to-back REQUEST_SENSE detection") to Linus > > > or there is more needed to bring ide-tape to the world of living? > > > > The oops will probably fixed the above commit. I don't have much idea > > about the DMA problem on 2.6.24 tho. But even with the above commit > > fixed, I doubt it would work. The buffer allocation code is broken > > and reliably triggered OOM on my test machine. While trying to locate > > the bug, I realized the complex code didn't do much good to begin with > > and just stripped it down, so I didn't actually tracked down the > > actual bug && the patch to simplify buffer management is way too large > > for 2.6.29, so unless someone is willing to hunt down the bug just for > > 2.6.29, we're kind of stuck. :-( > > So I take it that 2.6.30 (or one of the RCs) is worth trying (at least in so > far as preventing the oops on boot)? You could try 30-rc6 which runs pretty stable on my machines. It has the patch mentioned above in it. At least one user confirmed that it fixes ide-tape in his case. In case you still catch any OOPSes/warnings etc please send me the whole dmesg output along with how you trigger them. > > ... and I'm afraid we'll have to do some serious bugfixing since this > > driver is behaving really funny :). Stay tuned, I'm on it. > > Ok, I'll keep an eye out for updates. Presumedly we're talking 2.6.31 or > .32 here. Already in .31-rc1 there's will more patches cleaning up ide-tape so if you could try that and send us bug reports will be simply swell :). Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris.