Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 01:57:50 +0300 From: Roman Kurakin <rik@cronyx.ru> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: [Fwd: [Fwd: Re: ATA/CHS problem]] Message-ID: <406363EE.2030805@cronyx.ru>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070708020200040009060405
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
S?ren Schmidt wrote:
> Roman Kurakin wrote:
>
>> This is not an LBA request. ATA driver thinks that I have 80G CHS
>> device, cause it's ATA_FLAG_54_58
>> is zero. (This decision is incorrect, we shouldn't relay on this
>> flag). I've checked another seagate 80G drive in
>> CHS mode(by driver hacking), and problematic one with LBA mode. I get
>> the same behavior on both with CHS.
>> And both work fine in LBA mode. It also should be mentioned that I
>> get this problem on machine with
>> ICH2 controller, and it seems that I don't have such problem on other
>> machine with ICH5
>
>
> Hmm, we could loosen up this check (Se patch below) but that will
> probably break support for real old ATA disks (note that those old
Probably I'll do something like that, but since I've already lost some
time on this problem
I want to get why CHS mode doesn't works. I can't understand how using
of ICH2 could lead
to such problems ... (I'll try to get access to other ICH2 and non ICH2
machines to make
extra checks).
As I understand before using CHS we issue command 91h, to set proper CHS
mode.
I have one really CHS device and it seems to be working.
> systems most likely will have trouble with -current anyways).
> If I coul dhave my ways, we wouldn't even try to support disks that
> doesn't support LBA....
I think we could use another way to check old ata. Why no to use bit9
from word 49 and if
device really ATA, why it's 60-61 words are non zero?
>> PS. If you have any ideas, or if you have any materials (standards
>> for example) about ATA/ATAPI and you
>> can share them with me, please let me know. I am not ata developer,
>> so this is a bit difficalt for me to
>> dig this problem.
>
>
> Go to t13.org they are the standards body for ATA etc...
I already have a couple of drafts, but probably I need to get some more
information.
Please take a look to my patch. It makes output more informative. If I
have it before I started to dig,
I didn't lost so much time. There is a couple of places where we may
need to apply the alike patches.
rik
--------------070708020200040009060405
Content-Type: text/plain;
name="ata-queue.patch"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline;
filename="ata-queue.patch"
--- ata-queue.c.orig Tue Mar 23 20:39:22 2004
+++ ata-queue.c Thu Mar 25 00:45:51 2004
@@ -316,7 +316,9 @@
(request->dmastat & ATA_BMSTAT_ERROR))
printf(" dma=0x%02x", request->dmastat);
if (!(request->flags & (ATA_R_ATAPI | ATA_R_CONTROL)))
- printf(" LBA=%llu", (unsigned long long)request->u.ata.lba);
+ printf((request->device->flags & ATA_D_USE_CHS)
+ ? " CHS=%llx" : " LBA=%llu",
+ (unsigned long long)request->u.ata.lba);
printf("\n");
}
--------------070708020200040009060405--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?406363EE.2030805>