Re: libata FUA revisited

From: Jeff Garzik
Date: Fri Feb 16 2007 - 13:15:34 EST

Tejun Heo wrote:

Robert Hancock wrote:
[--correct summary snipped--]
Given the above, what I'm proposing to do is:

-Remove the blacklisting of Maxtor BANC1G10 firmware for FUA. If we need to FUA-blacklist any drives this should likely be added to the existing "horkage" mechanism we now have. However, at this point I don't think that's needed, considering that I've seen no conclusive evidence that any drive has ever been established to have broken FUA.


-Add a new port flag ATA_FLAG_NO_FUA to indicate that a controller can't handle FUA commands, and add that flag to sata_sil. Force FUA off on any drive connected to a controller with this bit set.

There was some talk that sata_mv might have this problem, but I believe the conclusion was that it didn't. The only controllers that would are ones that actually try to interpret the ATA command codes and don't know about WRITE DMA FUA.

I think it would be better to add ATA_FLAG_FUA instead of ATA_FLAG_NO_FUA.

This is an interesting (if small) problem. I would propose a third option: add ATA_FLAG_NO_FUA to applicable /SATA/ drivers, but leave those without ATA_FLAG_SATA alone.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at