From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 20:11:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 20:11:17 -0500 Received: from [216.184.166.130] ([216.184.166.130]:52282 "EHLO scsoftware.sc-software.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 20:11:15 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 17:09:08 +0000 ( ) From: John Heil To: Linus Torvalds cc: Alan Cox , Vojtech Pavlik , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: ide.2.4.1-p3.01112001.patch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 12 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 16:52:00 -0800 (PST) > From: Linus Torvalds > To: John Heil > Cc: Alan Cox , Vojtech Pavlik , > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: ide.2.4.1-p3.01112001.patch > > > > On Fri, 12 Jan 2001, John Heil wrote: > > > On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 00:25:28 +0000 (GMT) > > > From: Alan Cox > > > To: Linus Torvalds > > > Cc: Vojtech Pavlik , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > > Subject: Re: ide.2.4.1-p3.01112001.patch > > > > > > > what the bug is, and whether there is some other work-around, and whether > > > > it is 100% certain that it is just those two controllers (maybe the other > > > > ones are buggy too, but the 2.2.x tests basically cured their symptoms too > > > > and peopl ehaven't reported them because they are "fixed"). > > > > > > I've not seen reports on the later chips. If they had been buggy and then > > > fixed I'd have expected much unhappy ranting before the change > > > > The "fix" was an hdparm command like hdparm -X66 -m16c1d1 /dev/hda. > > Which I set for my VIA 686a on a Tyan mobo w a 1G Athlon. > > Careful. It may be that your fix just avoids the corruption because the > other changes make it ok - like the 16-sector multi-count thing maybe > hides a problem that might still exist - it just changes the "normal" > timing so that you won't ever see it in practice any more. > > These kinds of magic interactions is why I'm not at all happy about driver > changes until people really know what it was that caused it, and _know_ > that it's gone. > > Anyway, for you the problem apparently happened even on a 686a, but just > the 586 series. Correct? Yes, initially the 686a was problematic, now with an 80 wire cable its fine. One point of clarification... I started out with a simple hdparm -d1 which failed 85% of the time. I added the other stuff only to enhance the -d0 state I was left with. I then changed to the 80 wire cables and retried with only -d1 again, and to my surprise, the problems never came back and DMA stayed on. A while later, I added -X66 and it too worked great. Then lastly came the re-add of the rest giving current state. > > Linus > ----------------------------------------------------------------- John Heil South Coast Software Custom systems software for UNIX and IBM MVS mainframes 1-714-774-6952 kerndev@sc-software.com johnhscs@sc-software.com http://www.sc-software.com ----------------------------------------------------------------- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/