Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751227AbWCBCq2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Mar 2006 21:46:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751165AbWCBCq2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Mar 2006 21:46:28 -0500 Received: from mail.dvmed.net ([216.237.124.58]:5270 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750870AbWCBCq1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Mar 2006 21:46:27 -0500 Message-ID: <44065C7C.6090509@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 21:46:20 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Eric D. Mudama" CC: Jens Axboe , Tejun Heo , Nicolas Mailhot , Mark Lord , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Carlos Pardo Subject: Re: FUA and 311x (was Re: LibPATA code issues / 2.6.15.4) References: <1141239617.23202.5.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <4405F471.8000602@rtr.ca> <1141254762.11543.10.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <311601c90603011719k43af0fbbg889f47d798e22839@mail.gmail.com> <440650BC.5090501@pobox.com> <4406512A.9080708@pobox.com> <311601c90603011820u4fc89b04te1be39b9ed2ef35b@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <311601c90603011820u4fc89b04te1be39b9ed2ef35b@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1041 Lines: 32 Eric D. Mudama wrote: > On 3/1/06, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>This also begs the question... what controller was being used, when the >>single Maxtor device listed in the blacklist was added? Perhaps it was >>a problem with the controller, not the device. >> >> Jeff > > > As reported here: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177951 > > the controller was a 3114, and the bug was "fixed" by blacklisting his > Maxtor drive's FUA support. I'd like Maxtor drives to be > un-blacklisted if possible. If its 3114 I agree un-blacklisting is the way to go... but its not clear to me whether the problematic configuration included sata_sil or sata_nv. Since I'm apparently blind :) which part of the bug points conclusively to sata_sil? Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/