Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 21 Jan 2007 18:17:01 -0600 | From | Robert Hancock <> | Subject | Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5 |
| |
Björn Steinbrink wrote: > On 2007.01.21 13:58:01 -0600, Robert Hancock wrote: >> Björn Steinbrink wrote: >>> All kernels were bad using that approach. So back to square 1. :/ >>> >>> Björn >>> >> OK guys, here's a new patch to try against 2.6.20-rc5: >> >> Right now when switching between ADMA mode and legacy mode (i.e. when >> going from doing normal DMA reads/writes to doing a FLUSH CACHE) we just >> set the ADMA GO register bit appropriately and continue with no delay. >> It looks like in some cases the controller doesn't respond to this >> immediately, it takes some nanoseconds for the controller's status >> registers to reflect the change that was made. It's possible that if we >> were trying to issue commands during this time, the controller might not >> react properly. This patch adds some code to wait for the status >> register to change to the state we asked for before continuing. > > Just got two exceptions with your patch, none of the debug messages were > issued. > > Björn
Hmm, another miss, apparently.. Has anyone tried removing these lines from nv_host_intr in 2.6.20-rc5 sata_nv.c and see what that does?
/* bail out if not our interrupt */ if (!(irq_stat & NV_INT_DEV)) return 0;
-- Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@nospamshaw.ca Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/
- 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/
| |