From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 30 12:57:36 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3BF637B401 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 12:57:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from postal3.es.net (postal3.es.net [198.128.3.207]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14D9143F3F for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 12:57:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from oberman@es.net) Received: from ptavv.es.net ([198.128.4.29]) by postal3.es.net (Postal Node 3) with ESMTP id MUA74016; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 12:57:32 -0800 Received: from ptavv (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ptavv.es.net (Tachyon Server) with ESMTP id 2032A5D07; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 12:57:33 -0800 (PST) To: ian j hart In-Reply-To: Message from ian j hart <200303291940.55250.ianjhart@ntlworld.com> Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 12:57:33 -0800 From: "Kevin Oberman" Message-Id: <20030330205733.2032A5D07@ptavv.es.net> cc: stable@freebsd.org cc: sos%sos@spider.deepcore.dk Subject: Re: Status of ATA tagging in Stable X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 20:57:38 -0000 > From: ian j hart > Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 19:40:55 +0000 > > On Saturday 29 March 2003 6:42 pm, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > I have a P3 system running STABLE built on March 7. I installed a new > > IBM DTLA disk drive and was distressed at its slowness, so I tried > > turning on tagging to see if that would help. It seemed to, until... > > What do you mean by *new*? These drives were renamed some long time ago. > IIRC quality was a bit poor for early drives. > > > > > 3 AM when my periodic tasks started running. The system lost all disk > > access and logged lots of errors (a few of which I added to the end of > > this message). > > > > I rebooted the system this morning and the problem re-appeared when fsck > > ran. I then turned off tagged queuing and the system came up normally. > > > > Is there some problem with the DTLA drive or is this a driver problem? > > Yes, the drive could be DOA. However it's equally likely to be the controller > or the cable. Lots of M/Bs have suspect UDMA implementations. > > My IC35L080's are fine (GigaByte 7VTXE+) > > Take a look at this for starters (wrapped). > > http://ssddom01.hgst.com/tech/techlib.nsf/techdocs/\ > 85256AB8006A31E587256A7800700048/$file/dtla_com2.pdf Thanks for the poke to get my brain functioning, Ian. As you suspected, the DTLA drive is NOT a new drive. It was manufactured in 2000 and totally lost write capability yesterday. I have fallen back to my old IBM drive which is reporting excessive errors, but at least generally works and I will be returning this drive to our PC support guy who called it "new". I think th cable is OK as all other drives on the system are ATA100 and all are behaving properly. Thanks again! R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634