I have this problem several times, always with the same harddrive, a
samsung sp2004c. My samsung hd161hj and hd321kj don't seem to suffer
from this problem. I do not know when exactly it happened for the
first, but it has happened twice on a 2.6.22 kernel.
Is there anything that can be done about this (besides disabling adma
for all drives), or any information i can provide to help?
Please CC me, as i am not a member of this mailinglist.
Sincerely,
Maarten Maathuis.
dmesg snippet:
ata4: timeout waiting for ADMA IDLE, stat=0x440
ata4.00: qc timeout (cmd 0x2f)
ata4: failed to read log page 10h (errno=-5)
ata4.00: exception Emask 0x1 SAct 0x1 SErr 0x380000 action 0x2 frozen
ata4.00: (CPB resp_flags 0x11: CMD error)
ata4.00: cmd 60/80:00:89:b0:30/00:00:02:00:00/40 tag 0 cdb 0x0 data 65536 in
res 51/84:00:02:00:00/84:00:02:00:00/40 Emask 0x10 (ATA bus error)
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0xd1)
ata4: device not ready (errno=-16), forcing hardreset
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: reset failed, giving up
ata4.00: disabled
ata4: EH pending after completion, repeating EH (cnt=4)
ata4: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x3d0000 action 0x2 frozen
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: reset failed, giving up
ata4: EH pending after completion, repeating EH (cnt=3)
ata4: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x3d0000 action 0x2 frozen
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: reset failed, giving up
ata4: EH pending after completion, repeating EH (cnt=2)
ata4: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x3d0000 action 0x2 frozen
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: reset failed, giving up
ata4: EH pending after completion, repeating EH (cnt=1)
ata4: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x3d0000 action 0x2 frozen
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: port is slow to respond, please be patient (Status 0x80)
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: hard resetting port
ata4: COMRESET failed (errno=-16)
ata4: reset failed, giving up
ata4: EH pending after 5 tries, giving up
sd 3:0:0:0: [sdc] Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE,SUGGEST_OK
sd 3:0:0:0: [sdc] Sense Key : Aborted Command [current] [descriptor]
Descriptor sense data with sense descriptors (in hex):
72 0b 47 00 00 00 00 0c 00 0a 80 00 00 00 00 00
02 00 00 02
sd 3:0:0:0: [sdc] Add. Sense: Scsi parity error
end_request: I/O error, dev sdc, sector 36745353
ata4: EH complete
ata4.00: detaching (SCSI 3:0:0:0)
sd 3:0:0:0: [sdc] Synchronizing SCSI cache
sd 3:0:0:0: [sdc] Result: hostbyte=DID_BAD_TARGET
driverbyte=DRIVER_OK,SUGGEST_OK
sd 3:0:0:0: [sdc] Stopping disk
sd 3:0:0:0: [sdc] START_STOP FAILED
sd 3:0:0:0: [sdc] Result: hostbyte=DID_BAD_TARGET
driverbyte=DRIVER_OK,SUGGEST_OK
scsi 3:0:0:0: rejecting I/O to dead device
scsi 3:0:0:0: rejecting I/O to dead device
scsi 3:0:0:0: rejecting I/O to dead device
scsi 3:0:0:0: rejecting I/O to dead device
scsi 3:0:0:0: rejecting I/O to dead device
Maarten Maathuis wrote:
> I have this problem several times, always with the same harddrive, a
> samsung sp2004c. My samsung hd161hj and hd321kj don't seem to suffer
> from this problem. I do not know when exactly it happened for the
> first, but it has happened twice on a 2.6.22 kernel.
>
> Is there anything that can be done about this (besides disabling adma
> for all drives), or any information i can provide to help?
>
> Please CC me, as i am not a member of this mailinglist.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Maarten Maathuis.
>
> dmesg snippet:
>
> ata4: timeout waiting for ADMA IDLE, stat=0x440
> ata4.00: qc timeout (cmd 0x2f)
> ata4: failed to read log page 10h (errno=-5)
> ata4.00: exception Emask 0x1 SAct 0x1 SErr 0x380000 action 0x2 frozen
> ata4.00: (CPB resp_flags 0x11: CMD error)
> ata4.00: cmd 60/80:00:89:b0:30/00:00:02:00:00/40 tag 0 cdb 0x0 data 65536 in
> res 51/84:00:02:00:00/84:00:02:00:00/40 Emask 0x10 (ATA bus error)
Sounds like the drive has gotten into a really hosed state after this
point. The SError register is showing a CRC error, disparity error, and
10b to 8b decode error, which indicates that there are some major SATA
communication problems happening.
It could be a hardware problem (bad drive, bad SATA cable, insufficient
power, etc.) or maybe this is another drive with broken NCQ..
--
Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove "nospam" from [email protected]
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/
A broken cable seems like a realistic possibility, so i swapped it for
another cable. I will try if that solves the problem.
Maarten.
On 8/25/07, Robert Hancock <[email protected]> wrote:
> Maarten Maathuis wrote:
> > I have this problem several times, always with the same harddrive, a
> > samsung sp2004c. My samsung hd161hj and hd321kj don't seem to suffer
> > from this problem. I do not know when exactly it happened for the
> > first, but it has happened twice on a 2.6.22 kernel.
> >
> > Is there anything that can be done about this (besides disabling adma
> > for all drives), or any information i can provide to help?
> >
> > Please CC me, as i am not a member of this mailinglist.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Maarten Maathuis.
> >
> > dmesg snippet:
> >
> > ata4: timeout waiting for ADMA IDLE, stat=0x440
> > ata4.00: qc timeout (cmd 0x2f)
> > ata4: failed to read log page 10h (errno=-5)
> > ata4.00: exception Emask 0x1 SAct 0x1 SErr 0x380000 action 0x2 frozen
> > ata4.00: (CPB resp_flags 0x11: CMD error)
> > ata4.00: cmd 60/80:00:89:b0:30/00:00:02:00:00/40 tag 0 cdb 0x0 data 65536 in
> > res 51/84:00:02:00:00/84:00:02:00:00/40 Emask 0x10 (ATA bus error)
>
> Sounds like the drive has gotten into a really hosed state after this
> point. The SError register is showing a CRC error, disparity error, and
> 10b to 8b decode error, which indicates that there are some major SATA
> communication problems happening.
>
> It could be a hardware problem (bad drive, bad SATA cable, insufficient
> power, etc.) or maybe this is another drive with broken NCQ..
>
> --
> Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada
> To email, remove "nospam" from [email protected]
> Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/
>
>
I have not had any issues, i swapped the cable because a while ago i
had to check the connection of the drive after the bios failed to
detect the drive. That is why i considered that a posibility. Kernel
2.6.18 does not have NCQ support for nvidia chipsets, so that cannot
be it.
Maarten.
On 8/28/07, Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 25 2007 15:37, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
> >
> >A broken cable seems like a realistic possibility, so i swapped it for
> >another cable. I will try if that solves the problem.
>
> Hi, did you have any success/failure, other updates?
> I am facing a similar problem (just posted to [email protected]),
> but also with 2.6.18, and it does not look like an NCQ or loose cable problem (got a
> backplane, and sda is working normal).
>
> Jan
> --
>
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:06:41 +0200 "Maarten Maathuis" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have not had any issues, i swapped the cable because a while ago i
> had to check the connection of the drive after the bios failed to
> detect the drive. That is why i considered that a posibility. Kernel
> 2.6.18 does not have NCQ support for nvidia chipsets, so that cannot
> be it.
>
> Maarten.
>
> On 8/28/07, Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 25 2007 15:37, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
> > >
> > >A broken cable seems like a realistic possibility, so i swapped it for
> > >another cable. I will try if that solves the problem.
> >
> > Hi, did you have any success/failure, other updates?
> > I am facing a similar problem (just posted to [email protected]),
> > but also with 2.6.18, and it does not look like an NCQ or loose cable problem (got a
> > backplane, and sda is working normal).
> >
This is a rather comedic email thread, with people top-posting, others
leaving others off the cc list, Robert's MUA reliably and inexplicably
mangling both In-Reply-To: and References: thus breaking threading, no
visible sign of how Jan got involved and no linux-ide cc's.
Enough time has passed for everyone to forget all about this. So Maarten,
if you still believe that this is still a kernel bug then please update us
on its status and provide a full description for linux-ide.. Please use
reply-to-all for that.
Thanks.
At this point it safe to say that it was a cable related issue.
I swapped it to be sure and i haven't had issues since.
Sincerely,
Maarten Maathuis.
On 9/5/07, Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:06:41 +0200 "Maarten Maathuis" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I have not had any issues, i swapped the cable because a while ago i
> > had to check the connection of the drive after the bios failed to
> > detect the drive. That is why i considered that a posibility. Kernel
> > 2.6.18 does not have NCQ support for nvidia chipsets, so that cannot
> > be it.
> >
> > Maarten.
> >
> > On 8/28/07, Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Aug 25 2007 15:37, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
> > > >
> > > >A broken cable seems like a realistic possibility, so i swapped it for
> > > >another cable. I will try if that solves the problem.
> > >
> > > Hi, did you have any success/failure, other updates?
> > > I am facing a similar problem (just posted to [email protected]),
> > > but also with 2.6.18, and it does not look like an NCQ or loose cable problem (got a
> > > backplane, and sda is working normal).
> > >
>
> This is a rather comedic email thread, with people top-posting, others
> leaving others off the cc list, Robert's MUA reliably and inexplicably
> mangling both In-Reply-To: and References: thus breaking threading, no
> visible sign of how Jan got involved and no linux-ide cc's.
>
> Enough time has passed for everyone to forget all about this. So Maarten,
> if you still believe that this is still a kernel bug then please update us
> on its status and provide a full description for linux-ide.. Please use
> reply-to-all for that.
>
> Thanks.
>
On Sep 5 2007 09:48, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On 8/28/07, Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Aug 25 2007 15:37, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
>> > >
>> > >A broken cable seems like a realistic possibility, so i swapped it for
>> > >another cable. I will try if that solves the problem.
>> >
>> > Hi, did you have any success/failure, other updates?
>> > I am facing a similar problem (just posted to [email protected]),
>> > but also with 2.6.18, and it does not look like an NCQ or loose cable problem (got a
>> > backplane, and sda is working normal).
>
>This is a rather comedic email thread, with people top-posting, others
>leaving others off the cc list, Robert's MUA reliably and inexplicably
>mangling both In-Reply-To: and References: thus breaking threading, no
>visible sign of how Jan got involved and no linux-ide cc's.
I wrote Maarten a private mail, w/o any mailing lists CCed or BCCed,
but with References: (just hit reply button and removed CCs) because I
assumed his problem was really just the cabling in the end, which does
not apply to me at all.
>Enough time has passed for everyone to forget all about this. So Maarten,
>if you still believe that this is still a kernel bug then please update us
>on its status and provide a full description for linux-ide.. Please use
>reply-to-all for that.