> While this can be moved into the man page, I don't see how a
> message like this can significantly slow down booting, unless you have a
> slow serial console. However, a pointer is still useful; I'd suggest a
> shorter message like:
>
> ad0: DMA disabled: See ad(4) man page for possible
On Wed, 22 Dec 1999, Soren Schmidt wrote:
> > ad0: ATA-4 disk at ata0 as master
> > ad0: 12416MB (25429824 sectors), 25228 cyls, 16 heads, 63 S/T, 512 B/S
> > ad0: 16 secs/int, 1 depth queue, UDMA33
> > ...
> >
> > Although I coulda sworn it was an ATA/66 device with the proper cable.
> > Hmm.
It seems Pim van Grol wrote:
> Good job, the latest revision works, allthough in DMA mode.
Thanks!
> By the way, my motherboard (Epox EP-51MVP3G-M) indeed supports a
> 82c596 as south bridge, containing a (82c)571 device as IDE controller.
> From dmesg:
>
> found-> vendor=0x1106, dev=0x0
Soren Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems Nick Hibma wrote:
> > > If you end up doing this, can you have the driver print a line letting
> > > people know this is intentional? i.e.,
> > >
> > > ad0: DMA disabled: This drive does not properly support DMA mode.
> > > ad0: To force DMA
Nick Hibma wrote:
>
> > If you end up doing this, can you have the driver print a line letting
> > people know this is intentional? i.e.,
> >
> > ad0: DMA disabled: This drive does not properly support DMA mode.
> > ad0: To force DMA for this drive (at your own risk) set flags 0xXX.
>
> Let's n
It seems Nick Hibma wrote:
> > > Mentioning it in the manpage should be sufficient I guess. Blacklisting
> > > devices sounds like a good idea if tey fail to work correctly in many
> > > cases.
> >
> > The problem being how to get a list that is "good enough" for the
> > majority of cases.
>
> I
> > Mentioning it in the manpage should be sufficient I guess. Blacklisting
> > devices sounds like a good idea if tey fail to work correctly in many
> > cases.
>
> The problem being how to get a list that is "good enough" for the
> majority of cases.
I'd like to see it the other way around: Mak
It seems Nick Hibma wrote:
> > If you end up doing this, can you have the driver print a line letting
> > people know this is intentional? i.e.,
> >
> > ad0: DMA disabled: This drive does not properly support DMA mode.
> > ad0: To force DMA for this drive (at your own risk) set flags 0xXX.
>
> If you end up doing this, can you have the driver print a line letting
> people know this is intentional? i.e.,
>
> ad0: DMA disabled: This drive does not properly support DMA mode.
> ad0: To force DMA for this drive (at your own risk) set flags 0xXX.
Let's not go the Linux way and make the
It seems Pim van Grol wrote:
> For your information:
>
> I encountered the same problem on a MVP3 board (Epox ep-mvp3g-m)
> with via vt82c596, which worked well untill 13-12-99. Matrox HD.
Are you sure you mean 596 ?? that is NOT supported (yet).
> Correctly interpreted as doing UDMA33. From ve
It seems Alex Zepeda wrote:
>
> Perhaps blacklisting all WD/Maxtor drives that don't report an ATA
> version, as the ata (and wd) driver works flawlessly in UDMA33 mode with
> my setup:
Hmm, thats an idea...
> ata-pci0: at device 7.1 on pci0
> ata-pci0: Busmastering DMA supported
> ata0 at 0x0
On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Soren Schmidt wrote:
> It probably because I relaxed the requirements for doing WDMA on disks
> that doesn't bother to tell whihc verson of the ATA spec they conform to.
> I think your case is the more seldom one, but I'm this close to
> blacklisting all WD/Maxtor drives, tha
It seems Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> The thread 'vm_page_remove panic' that Tamiji Homma initiated may be
> related. She is getting a panic in the buffer cache subsystem while
> using the new ATA driver with softupdates + NFS exported filesystems.
>
> I do not know if it is relat
It seems Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> Same here, but with a toshiba laptop disk. I have to comment out a version
> test in ata-disk.c to get it to work.
I've just a few hours ago committed a change that does this...
>
> --- ata-disk.c 1999/12/18 20:06:30 1.46
> +++ ata-disk.c 1999/12/21 21:48:2
:> it broke again as I recompiled my system yesterday (This was the first
:> time after it had been fixed, so I don't know when exactly it broke).
:>
:> Harddisks: Western Digital Caviar (2.0 GB), non-DMA and
:>Western Digital Caviar (2.5 GB), DMA-33.
:> Mainboard: Asus P5A-B Super7
:
Theo van Klaveren wrote:
>
> When installing the 08-dec-1999 snapshot (before ATA went in GENERIC),
> a recompile from the kernel with the ATA driver instead of the WD
> driver resulted in an unbootable system because of the following
> error (approx.):
>
> mounting root /dev/ad0s1a
> ata-mast
It seems Doug White wrote:
> >
> > It probably because I relaxed the requirements for doing WDMA on disks
> > that doesn't bother to tell whihc verson of the ATA spec they conform to.
> > I think your case is the more seldom one, but I'm this close to
> > blacklisting all WD/Maxtor drives, that w
On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Soren Schmidt wrote:
> > Harddisks: Western Digital Caviar (2.0 GB), non-DMA and
> >Western Digital Caviar (2.5 GB), DMA-33.
> > Mainboard: Asus P5A-B Super7
> > Chipset: ALi Aladdin V AGPset
>
> It probably because I relaxed the requirements for doing WDMA on di
Soren Schmidt writes:
> It seems Theo van Klaveren wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Soren Schmidt wrote:
> >
> > > > Harddisks: Western Digital Caviar (2.0 GB), non-DMA and
> > > >Western Digital Caviar (2.5 GB), DMA-33.
> > > > Mainboard: Asus P5A-B Super7
> > > > Chipset: ALi
It seems Theo van Klaveren wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Soren Schmidt wrote:
>
> > > Harddisks: Western Digital Caviar (2.0 GB), non-DMA and
> > >Western Digital Caviar (2.5 GB), DMA-33.
> > > Mainboard: Asus P5A-B Super7
> > > Chipset: ALi Aladdin V AGPset
> >
> > It probably becau
On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Soren Schmidt wrote:
> > Harddisks: Western Digital Caviar (2.0 GB), non-DMA and
> >Western Digital Caviar (2.5 GB), DMA-33.
> > Mainboard: Asus P5A-B Super7
> > Chipset: ALi Aladdin V AGPset
>
> It probably because I relaxed the requirements for doing WDMA on di
It seems Theo van Klaveren wrote:
>
> When installing the 08-dec-1999 snapshot (before ATA went in GENERIC),
> a recompile from the kernel with the ATA driver instead of the WD
> driver resulted in an unbootable system because of the following
> error (approx.):
>
> mounting root /dev/ad0s1a
>
When installing the 08-dec-1999 snapshot (before ATA went in GENERIC),
a recompile from the kernel with the ATA driver instead of the WD
driver resulted in an unbootable system because of the following
error (approx.):
mounting root /dev/ad0s1a
ata-master: lost disk contact
ata: resetting devi
23 matches
Mail list logo
