Re: [PATCH] Bogus LBA48 drives

[Jeff Garzik]

Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2004, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> > Andries Brouwer wrote:
> >
> > > Hmm. I read in my copy of ATA7:
> > >
> > > 6.16.55 Words (103:100): Maximum user LBA for 48-bit Address feature set
> > > Words (103:100) contain a value that is one greater than the maximum LBA
> > > in user accessable space when the 48-bit Addressing feature set is supported.
> > > The maximum value that shall be placed in this field is 0000FFFFFFFFFFFFh.
> > > Support of these words is mandatory if the 48-bit Address feature set is supported.
> > >
> > > Do you read differently?
> >
> > The errata is, one needs to check that field for zero, and use the other
> > one if so...
>
>
> Which is not sufficient for `my' drives, since I get disk errors if I just use
> the other capacity field and don't disable LBA48 completely.
>
> I'll check the ATA specs myself, if I find some time...

If it's reporting the "48-bit feature set supported" but doesn't really 
support it, I'd vote for broken drive :)  Maybe check for a firmware 
update on the manufacturer's web site?

	Jeff




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/