Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 17:43:05 +0100 From: ian j hart <ianjhart@ntlworld.com> To: Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ATA tag queuing broken... Message-ID: <200304251743.06239.ianjhart@ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: <20030424202433.GB79923@perrin.int.nxad.com> References: <20030424054114.GY79923@perrin.int.nxad.com> <200304241925.31126.ianjhart@ntlworld.com> <20030424202433.GB79923@perrin.int.nxad.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 24 April 2003 9:24 pm, Sean Chittenden wrote: > > > Alright, well it's apparently no surprise to folks that ATA tag > > > queuing is broken at the moment. Are there any objections to me > > > adding a few cautious words to ata(4) and tuning(7) that advise > > > _against_ the use of ata tag queuing given that they're likely the > > > fastest way to reboot a -STABLE box? > > > > > > Here's a PR that I tacked a tad bit of info into: > > > > > > http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/42563 > > > > That's news to me, works just fine here (4.8-R). > > That's what my box is as well. See the bottom of the PR for details, > but an egrep -r via NFS reboots the box consistently as well as a > local CVSup + nice +20 buildworld. Does it die during the cvs or the buildworld? Buildworld is not very disk intensive. If you nice +20, even more so. > > > What do you mean by "at the moment"? That pr is six months old. > > Agreed, but since there's no voting for bugs in gnats, I figured I'd > "me too" the PR with an updated time/date and slightly more info. > > > Did you check the list first? I sent another "works for me" less > > than a month ago. (Thread: Status of ATA tagging in Stable Kevin > > Oberman 20030329) > > Yup. It "works" in the sense that under low load, the box works. As > soon as I push it, however, it panics and resets. > > > I note that the pr originator also has the *known to be broken* DTLA > > drives. > > Hrm, well, according to the man pages I've got the right stuff... or > not, I don't remember the qualifications mentioned in tuning(7): > > atapci0: <VIA 8233 ATA100 controller> port 0xdc00-0xdc0f at device 17.1 on > pci0 ata0: at 0x1f0 irq 14 on atapci0 > ata1: at 0x170 irq 15 on atapci0 > ad0: 58644MB <IC35L060AVER07-0> [119150/16/63] at ata0-master tagged > UDMA100 ad2: 58644MB <IC35L060AVER07-0> [119150/16/63] at ata1-master > tagged UDMA100 I have very similar hardware. I should be able to reproduce any given disk load. Perhaps we should take this off list and try a few things. Before I go, I should mention that I did have similar "tag" error messages a few weeks ago. I also had a reproducable panic when starting vinum from single user mode. This turned out to be one (or more) of the following. o 1 bad RAM stick o 1 marginal (on spec) RAM stick o Aggressive BIOS settings o Air filters clogged o Unseasonably warm weather (+10F) o Phase of the moon Find a display card and run memtest86 for an hour or so. Take a note of the memory throughput (for BIOS tuning). > > Grump, nm. I may extend the warning from tuning(7) over into ata(4) > simply because tuning(7) seems to contain more info on ata(4) in this > regard. -sc -- ian j hart Quoth the raven, bite me! Salem Saberhagen (Episode LXXXI: The Phantom Menace)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200304251743.06239.ianjhart>