Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:47:46 -0700 | From | Petr Vandrovec <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist |
| |
Tejun Heo wrote: > Robert Hancock wrote: >> Tejun Heo wrote: >>> Another member of HTS5416* family doing spurious NCQ completion. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com> >>> Cc: Enrico Sardi <enricoss@tiscali.it> >>> --- >>> drivers/ata/libata-core.c | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c >>> index adfae9d..fbca8d8 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c >>> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c >>> @@ -3803,6 +3803,7 @@ static const struct ata_blacklist_entry >>> ata_device_blacklist [] = { >>> /* Drives which do spurious command completion */ >>> { "HTS541680J9SA00", "SB2IC7EP", ATA_HORKAGE_NONCQ, }, >>> { "HTS541612J9SA00", "SBDIC7JP", ATA_HORKAGE_NONCQ, }, >>> + { "Hitachi HTS541616J9SA00", "SB4OC70P", ATA_HORKAGE_NONCQ, }, >>> { "WDC WD740ADFD-00NLR1", NULL, ATA_HORKAGE_NONCQ, }, >>> >>> /* Devices with NCQ limits */ >>> >> Is that the right ID string? Strange that that one has Hitachi at the >> front and the others don't.. > > Yeah, I realized that and asked Enrico about it. :-)
I think that "new" one is correct, while old ones are incorrect (unless it uses strstr()) - all my Hitachis claim to be Hitachis - like this one (which seems to work fine with NCQ):
gwy:~# hdparm -i /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Model=Hitachi HDT725032VLA380 , FwRev=V54OA52A, SerialNo= VFA200R208LH5J Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
Petr
- 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/
| |