Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932105AbXAVRx3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:53:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932108AbXAVRx3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:53:29 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:48882 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932105AbXAVRx2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:53:28 -0500 X-Authenticated: #5039886 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 18:53:22 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Steinbrink To: Robert Hancock , Jeff Garzik , Chr , Alistair John Strachan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, htejun@gmail.com, jens.axboe@oracle.com, lwalton@real.com, pomac@vapor.com Subject: Re: SATA exceptions with 2.6.20-rc5 Message-ID: <20070122175321.GA2647@atjola.homenet> Mail-Followup-To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Steinbrink , Robert Hancock , Jeff Garzik , Chr , Alistair John Strachan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, htejun@gmail.com, jens.axboe@oracle.com, lwalton@real.com, pomac@vapor.com References: <45B2DF43.8080304@garzik.org> <20070121045437.GA7387@atjola.homenet> <45B30A98.3030206@shaw.ca> <20070121083618.GA2434@atjola.homenet> <20070121184032.GA3220@atjola.homenet> <45B3C5C9.4010007@shaw.ca> <20070121222714.GA2473@atjola.homenet> <45B4027D.30805@shaw.ca> <20070122161239.GA2402@atjola.homenet> <20070122165707.GA5936@atjola.homenet> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20070122165707.GA5936@atjola.homenet> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1375 Lines: 32 On 2007.01.22 17:57:08 +0100, Bj?rn Steinbrink wrote: > On 2007.01.22 17:12:40 +0100, Bj?rn Steinbrink wrote: > > On 2007.01.21 18:17:01 -0600, Robert Hancock wrote: > > > Hmm, another miss, apparently.. Has anyone tried removing these lines > > > >from nv_host_intr in 2.6.20-rc5 sata_nv.c and see what that does? > > > > > > /* bail out if not our interrupt */ > > > if (!(irq_stat & NV_INT_DEV)) > > > return 0; > > > > Running a kernel with the return statement replace by a line that prints > > the irq_stat instead. > > > > Currently I'm seeing lots of 0x10 on ata1 and 0x0 on ata2. > > 40 minutes stress test now and no exception yet. What's interesting is > that ata1 saw exactly one interrupt with irq_stat 0x0, all others that > might have get dropped are as above. > I'll keep it running for some time and will then re-enable the return > statement to see if there's a relation between the irq_stat 0x0 and the > exception. No, doesn't seem to be related, did get 2 exceptions, but no irq_stat 0x0 for ata1. Syslog/dmesg has nothing new either, still the same pattern of dismissed irq_stats. Bj?rn - 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/