Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 12:33:19 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= <sos@DeepCore.dk> To: Putinas Piliponis <putinas.piliponis@icnspot.net> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: system lockup - ata spurious interrupts - somehow updated Message-ID: <405D7D7F.3090209@DeepCore.dk> In-Reply-To: <000401c40f33$86ce9210$1e64a8c0@spotripoli.local> References: <405B9DCD.9040907@6by9.org> <0a0c01c40e90$2d86e070$32cba1cd@science1> <000401c40f33$86ce9210$1e64a8c0@spotripoli.local>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Putinas Piliponis wrote: > As for me, it looks what ata code is not correctly handling more then one > ata controller. If I set in bios compatible mode, and I have only P-ATA+ > S-ATA, everything works fine, I can boot in verbose mode, no spurious > interrupts at all. If I set in bios as bios default Enchanced mode for > S-ATA > then I still can boot in verbose mode, I see plenty of spurious interrupts > on ata2 and ata3 controllers, but system is still continues booting. If > I set > enchanced > mode for S-ATA + P-ATA I cannot boot either in verbose mode or either in > normal mode. System gets stuck forever ( or at least for long time ) > after I > see: > "Mounting root from ufs:ad8s3a". > and if I boot then in verbose mode, I see nonstopable spurious > interrupts on > ata2, ata3, ata4 and ata5. > > This is also could explain, why 5.2.1 is still stable with 4 ide drives, > and continuesly freezing or panicing with 6 ( or more I guess ) ide drives. > and as well why for some people configuration is working, either they use > 4 drives not on all different channels, but some of them maybe on same > channel ( again my guess ). ATA works just fine with any number of controllers (however your HW may not), my main test box has 16 channels in it and that still works :) Now, the above is more likely an interrupt setup/routing problem of sorts, if you get spurious interrupts *something* is yanking the interrupt line, but ATA knows that it hasn't requested anything and spits out the "spurious" warning. That said, the ICH5 support is written "blindfolded" as I do not have any such HW here in the lab. So if there is a problem with ATA on those, someone with the HW and enough kernel clue should look into it (or someone could land the needed HW in my lab, which could also bring support for the SW RAID on intel's)... -- -Søren
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?405D7D7F.3090209>