Re: New IDE code and DMA failures

Denis Vlasenko (vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua)
Thu, 11 Apr 2002 17:17:50 -0200

On 11 April 2002 10:52, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> >>3. Some timeout values got increased to more generally used values (in
> >> esp. IBM microdrives advice about timeout values. Could you see whatever
> >> the data doesn't eventually go to the disk after georgeous
> >> amounts of time.
> >
> > Erm.. my English comprehension fails here... do you say my disk
> > does not like bigger timeouts?
>
> Please just wait and look whatever the driver actually recovers (can be
> minutes...)

I tried that just today. Continued to work despite kupdated hung
in "D" state. After a long while box box froze. SysRq-B worked though.

In my first report to lkml I told that live disconnect of hdc
cured "D" state processes (yes I know I risk burning my southbridge...).
Do you want me to mail it again (there is ksymoopsed SysRq-T)?

> > unmaskirq = 1 (on)
> Could you try to disable this please? This can cause trouble
> as well.

Will try this, but I don't specifically seek to eliminate freezes,
I want to help debug new IDE code so that it will be no worse
than 2.4 in this failure mode. I don't want to eliminate DMA failures,
I _want to have them_ to see what IDE code will do.

--
vda
-
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/