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,
-Erik
-- Erik B. Andersen http://codepoet-consulting.com/ --This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 07 2003 - 22:00:20 EST