Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Tejun Heo wrote:
Another member of HTS5416* family doing spurious NCQ completion.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Enrico Sardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
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, },
applied
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Tejun Heo wrote: > Another member of HTS5416* family doing spurious NCQ completion. > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Enrico Sardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Jeff, ping. -- tejun - 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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Tejun Heo wrote: Another member of HTS5416* family doing spurious NCQ completion. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Enrico Sardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jeff, ping. -- tejun - 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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Tejun Heo wrote:
Another member of HTS5416* family doing spurious NCQ completion.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Enrico Sardi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
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, },
applied
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Petr Vandrovec wrote: >>> Hmmm... The last one (HTS541612J9SA00) is taken directly from hdparm >>> output, and I think I verified the patch with the reporter. Hmm... Can >>> anyone verify these module strings? >> >> Could well be that they've started attaching Hitachi to the ID strings >> now.. In the past it hasn't seemed to have been Hitachi's (and IBM's >> before that) practice to have it there, but maybe they see the >> advantage of being able to figure out who made the drive now :-) > > Perhaps ones sold directly by Hitachi are Hitachi, while ones sold > through OEMs are no-name? I dunno but I doubt they care that much about the model string but one way or the other we might have to do pattern matching on HTS541* anyway. -- tejun - 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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Robert Hancock wrote:
Tejun Heo wrote:
Petr Vandrovec wrote:
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 }
Hmmm... The last one (HTS541612J9SA00) is taken directly from hdparm
output, and I think I verified the patch with the reporter. Hmm... Can
anyone verify these module strings?
Could well be that they've started attaching Hitachi to the ID strings
now.. In the past it hasn't seemed to have been Hitachi's (and IBM's
before that) practice to have it there, but maybe they see the advantage
of being able to figure out who made the drive now :-)
Perhaps ones sold directly by Hitachi are Hitachi, while ones sold
through OEMs are no-name?
Petr
-
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/
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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Enrico Sardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Tejun Heo wrote:
Petr Vandrovec wrote:
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 }
Hmmm... The last one (HTS541612J9SA00) is taken directly from hdparm
output, and I think I verified the patch with the reporter. Hmm... Can
anyone verify these module strings?
Could well be that they've started attaching Hitachi to the ID strings
now.. In the past it hasn't seemed to have been Hitachi's (and IBM's
before that) practice to have it there, but maybe they see the advantage
of being able to figure out who made the drive now :-)
--
Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove "nospam" from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Petr Vandrovec wrote:
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 }
Hmmm... The last one (HTS541612J9SA00) is taken directly from hdparm
output, and I think I verified the patch with the reporter. Hmm... Can
anyone verify these module strings?
--
tejun
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Robert Hancock wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Another member of HTS5416* family doing spurious NCQ completion.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Cc: Enrico Sardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> ---
>> 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. :-)
--
tejun
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Tejun Heo wrote:
Another member of HTS5416* family doing spurious NCQ completion.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Enrico Sardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
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..
--
Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove "nospam" from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Tejun Heo wrote:
Another member of HTS5416* family doing spurious NCQ completion.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Enrico Sardi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
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..
--
Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove nospam from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Robert Hancock wrote:
Tejun Heo wrote:
Another member of HTS5416* family doing spurious NCQ completion.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Enrico Sardi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
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. :-)
--
tejun
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Petr Vandrovec wrote:
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 HdSw15uSec Fixed DTR10Mbs }
Hmmm... The last one (HTS541612J9SA00) is taken directly from hdparm
output, and I think I verified the patch with the reporter. Hmm... Can
anyone verify these module strings?
--
tejun
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Tejun Heo wrote:
Petr Vandrovec wrote:
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 HdSw15uSec Fixed DTR10Mbs }
Hmmm... The last one (HTS541612J9SA00) is taken directly from hdparm
output, and I think I verified the patch with the reporter. Hmm... Can
anyone verify these module strings?
Could well be that they've started attaching Hitachi to the ID strings
now.. In the past it hasn't seemed to have been Hitachi's (and IBM's
before that) practice to have it there, but maybe they see the advantage
of being able to figure out who made the drive now :-)
--
Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove nospam from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/
-
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/
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Enrico Sardi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
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 HdSw15uSec Fixed DTR10Mbs }
Petr
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Robert Hancock wrote:
Tejun Heo wrote:
Petr Vandrovec wrote:
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 HdSw15uSec Fixed DTR10Mbs }
Hmmm... The last one (HTS541612J9SA00) is taken directly from hdparm
output, and I think I verified the patch with the reporter. Hmm... Can
anyone verify these module strings?
Could well be that they've started attaching Hitachi to the ID strings
now.. In the past it hasn't seemed to have been Hitachi's (and IBM's
before that) practice to have it there, but maybe they see the advantage
of being able to figure out who made the drive now :-)
Perhaps ones sold directly by Hitachi are Hitachi, while ones sold
through OEMs are no-name?
Petr
-
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/
Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc5] libata: add HTS541616J9SA00 to NCQ blacklist
Petr Vandrovec wrote: Hmmm... The last one (HTS541612J9SA00) is taken directly from hdparm output, and I think I verified the patch with the reporter. Hmm... Can anyone verify these module strings? Could well be that they've started attaching Hitachi to the ID strings now.. In the past it hasn't seemed to have been Hitachi's (and IBM's before that) practice to have it there, but maybe they see the advantage of being able to figure out who made the drive now :-) Perhaps ones sold directly by Hitachi are Hitachi, while ones sold through OEMs are no-name? I dunno but I doubt they care that much about the model string but one way or the other we might have to do pattern matching on HTS541* anyway. -- tejun - 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/
