On 2007.01.21 18:17:01 -0600, Robert Hancock wrote: > 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;
Running a kernel with the return statement replace by a line that prints the irq_stat instead. Currently I'm seeing lots of 0x10 on ata1 and 0x0 on ata2. Björn - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
