Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5

[Robert Hancock]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Looks like all of these errors are from a FLUSH CACHE command and the 
> > drive is indicating that it is no longer busy, so presumably done. 
> > That's not a DMA-mapped command, so it wouldn't go through the ADMA 
> > machinery and I wouldn't have expected this to be handled any 
> > differently from before. Curious..
>
> It's possible the flush-cache command takes longer than 30 seconds, if 
> the cache is large, contents are discontiguous, etc.  It's a 
> pathological case, but possible.
>
> Or maybe flush-cache doesn't get a 30 second timeout, and it should...? 
>  (thinking out loud)
>
>     Jeff

If the flush was still in progress I would expect Busy to still be set, 
however..

--
Robert Hancock      Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/

-
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/