Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> Indeed this is a typo but has been fixed on 2.4.26:
> 
>         if (drive->removable && id != NULL) {
It never gets past this check because drive->removable is not set!

>                 if (id->config == 0x848a) return 1;     /* CompactFlash */
>                 if (!strncmp(id->model, "KODAK ATA_FLASH", 15)  /* Kodak */
>                  || !strncmp(id->model, "Hitachi CV", 10)       /* Hitachi */
>                  || !strncmp(id->model, "SunDisk SDCFB", 13)    /* old SanDisk */
>                  || !strncmp(id->model, "SanDisk SDCFB", 13)    /* SanDisk */
>                  || !strncmp(id->model, "HAGIWARA HPC", 12)     /* Hagiwara */
>                  || !strncmp(id->model, "LEXAR ATA_FLASH", 15)  /* Lexar */
>                  || !strncmp(id->model, "ATA_FLASH", 9))        /* Simple Tech */
>                 {
> 
> I haven't got much of a clue about IDE, but I can see the newer card supports
> DMA, and the older doesnt, but you are probably not using DMA on that? whats
> the output of "hdparm /dev/hda".
Ive attached the hdparm output, which is exactly the same for both cards.

> 
> Also can you show us dmesg from both old and new cards.
> 
I've noticed another interesting thing, when doing the same stuff which 
bails out on the new card (reading or writing larger amounts of data), 
sometimes with the old card a kernel message "VFS: Disk change detected 
on device 03:00" appears in the logfiles, which doesnt appear with the 
new card.

Also attached are the both dmesg outputs from booting up and the 
occurence of the error, respectively the disk change event. This logs 
are from an Adeos/Rtai patched kernel, but the exact same problem 
appears when booting with a stock 2.4.27 kernel to.