Messages in this thread | | | From | Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <> | Subject | Re: Silicon Image 3112A SATA trouble | Date | Sun, 30 Nov 2003 17:58:53 +0100 |
| |
On Sunday 30 of November 2003 17:51, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Sun, Nov 30 2003, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Jens Axboe wrote: > > >On Sun, Nov 30 2003, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > >>Hmm. actually I was under influence that we have generic ioctls in > > >> 2.6.x, but I can find only BLKSECTGET, BLKSECTSET was somehow lost. > > >> Jens? > > > > > >Probably because it's very dangerous to expose, echo something too big > > >and watch your data disappear. > > > > IMO, agreed. > > > > Max KB per request really should be set by the driver, as it's a > > hardware-specific thing that (as we see :)) is often errata-dependent.
Yep.
> Yes, it would be better to have a per-drive (or hwif) extra limiting > factor if it is needed. For this case it really isn't, so probably not > the best idea :) > > > Tangent: My non-pessimistic fix will involve submitting a single sector > > DMA r/w taskfile manually, then proceeding with the remaining sectors in > > another r/w taskfile. This doubles the interrupts on the affected > > chipset/drive combos, but still allows large requests. I'm not terribly > > Or split the request 50/50.
We can't - hardware will lock up.
--bart
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |