Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 23:45:06 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: "Tim Welch" <freebsd-stable@thepentagon.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= <sos@DeepCore.dk> Subject: Re: DMA errors with SATA on 5.x [one fix] Message-ID: <p0620075ebddd86599603@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <55368.65.7.255.129.1102402914.squirrel@65.7.255.129> References: <55368.65.7.255.129.1102402914.squirrel@65.7.255.129>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 1:01 AM -0600 12/7/04, Tim Welch wrote: >I'm getting NID not found/DMA errors on 5-STABLE with a Seagate 200gb >sata drive: > > ad2: FAILURE - WRITE_DMA status=51<READY,DSC,ERROR> > error=10<NID_NOT_FOUND> LBA=268435455 > >This appears to be a result of 48-bit addressing. Any time a write is >attempted to the sector above, I get multiple messages like this. It >continues until I shut down. After a bit of googling I found this post: > >http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2004-October/008821.html > >and applied the change suggested. It seems to have fixed the problem, >and I've had no troubles from this since Nov. 18th when I applied that >patch. I'm running an Intel 875PBZ board with the ich5 controller. >The drive in question is a Seagate ST3200822AS/3.01 (as reported by >dmesg). So the question is, will this patch be committed anytime soon? That looks like a pretty safe patch to make. The message says he just reduced the 48-bit trigger level by one: --- ata-lowlevel.c.orig Wed Nov 24 05:47:26 2004 +++ ata-lowlevel.c Wed Dec 8 22:45:39 2004 @@ -701,7 +701,7 @@ ATA_IDX_OUTB(atadev->channel, ATA_ALTSTAT, ATA_A_4BIT); /* only use 48bit addressing if needed (avoid bugs and overhead) */ - if ((lba > 268435455 || count > 256) && atadev->param && + if ((lba > 268435454 || count > 256) && atadev->param && atadev->param->support.command2 & ATA_SUPPORT_ADDRESS48) { /* translate command into 48bit version */ If this fixes a problem with large disks for both the original person and for you, then I suspect we should commit it. I don't know if we need to add a comment saying why we're going with 268435454 instead of 268435455, though. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p0620075ebddd86599603>