Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5

[Jens Axboe]

On Sun, Jan 14 2007, Robert Hancock wrote:
> 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..

I'd be surprised if the device would not obey the 7 second timeout rule
that seems to be set in stone and not allow more dirty in-drive cache
than it could flush out in approximately that time.

And BUSY should also be set for that case, as Robert indicates.

-- 
Jens Axboe

-
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/