From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 13 09:53:25 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D89316A4CE; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:53:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 871A043D1F; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:53:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iAD9rJPe025540; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 10:53:19 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 13 Nov 2004 10:50:59 +0100." <4195D903.2090801@DeepCore.dk> Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 10:53:19 +0100 Message-ID: <25539.1100339599@critter.freebsd.dk> Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk cc: Garance A Drosihn cc: Zoltan Frombach cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: Robert Watson Subject: Re: 5.3-RELEASE: WARNING - WRITE_DMA interrupt timout X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:53:25 -0000 In message <4195D903.2090801@DeepCore.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= wri tes: >Zoltan Frombach wrote: >> This is still an issue for me. Please read this post of mine: >> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2004-November/009420.html >> >> Can anyone help? I would gladely install test patches to track this >> problem down. My system is 5.3-R. And the WRITE_DMA warning happens at >> least twice a day, it is so predictable. With thanks, > >Hmmm, that warning is issued from ATA when requests has been returned to >the systems bio_taskqueue but the system hasn't finished them within the >timeout. Now this is an indication of the system being unresponsive >already at that point, or at least that was the idea. >It has nothing to do with a bad drive, since the interrupt was seen the >drive has finished the request it was asked, its the layers above ATA >that doesn't respond to the request beeing returned as finished. It is not really the task of the ata driver to fail requests at that time. How long is the timeout anyway ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.