On Sat, Aug 02 2003, Erik Andersen wrote:
> On Sat Aug 02, 2003 at 10:06:19PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Sad, 2003-08-02 at 18:42, Andries Brouwer wrote:
> > > OK, so we have to investigate. This strange test was inserted
> > > in 2.4 and 2.5 via Alan, and google gives me Alan's changelog:
> > >
> > > Linux 2.5.66-ac1
> > > o Don't issue WIN_SET_MAX on older drivers (Jens Axboe)
> > > (Breaks some Samsung)
> >
> > Some older Samsung drives don't abort WIN_SET_MAX but the firmware
> > hangs hence the check.
>
> Ok, I think I can actually test that one.
>
> <rummages in ye olde box of hardware>
>
> Cool, found it, I have an ancient Samsung SHD-3212A (426MB)
> drive that will hopefully show the problem.
>
> <sound of testing in the distance>
>
> Ok, found the problem. The current code (in addition to being
> badly written) does not even bother to test if the drive supports
> the HPA feature set before issuing a WIN_SET_MAX call. In my
> case, it didn't crash my Samsung drive, but it certainly did make
> it complain rather loudly.
>
> I have rewritten the init_idedisk_capacity() function and taught
> it to behave itself. It is now much cleaner IMHO, and will only
> issues SET_MAX* calls to drives that claim they support such
> things. I've tested this patch with a 200GB drive, a 120GB
> drive, an 80GB drive and my ancient Samsung drive and in each
> case (48bit LBA, 28bit LBA, 28bit CHS w/o support for HPA), my
> new version appears to the Right Thing(tm).
>
> Attached is a patch vs 2.4.22-pre10, and a patch vs 2.6.0-pre2.
> Please apply,
Very nice Erik, looks good!
-- Jens Axboe- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 07 2003 - 22:00:21 EST