lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: cmd64x: irq 14: nobody cared - system is dreadfully slow
Date
On Tuesday 23 June 2009, you wrote:
> We might need to bisect this one. But Frans, just for the record
> could you simply test reverting just that hunk? Thanks!

I'm way ahead of you :-)

Instead of a bisect [1] I decided to first see if some printks in both .26
and .31 would show anything useful.

With 2.6.31 and code included below I get:
hda: ST34342A, ATA DISK drive
FJP: id_dma_bug 0x7: &4: 0x0-0x4 no error
hda: MWDMA2 mode selected
hdc: Maxtor 6E040L0, ATA DISK drive
hdd: CD-ROM 56X/AKH, ATAPI CD/DVD-ROM drive
hdc: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4
FJP: ID_FIELD_VALID: 0x7 (true)
FJP: id_dma_bug 0x7: &4: 0x0-0x4 no error
hdc: MWDMA2 mode selected
hdd: host max PIO5 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4
FJP: ID_FIELD_VALID: 0x2 (true)
FJP: id_dma_bug 0x2: &2: 0x1-0x1 bad modes <-------------
hdd: bad DMA info in identify block
Note that this included a complete revert of 8d64fcd9 (with minor conflict
resolved).

Here's the same output with 2.6.26.3 with equivalent debug statements:
hda: ST34342A, ATA DISK drive
FJP: id_dma_bug 0x7: &4: 0x0-0x0 no error
hda: MWDMA2 mode selected
hdc: Maxtor 6E040L0, ATA DISK drive
hdd: CD-ROM 56X/AKH, ATAPI CD/DVD-ROM drive
FJP: id_dma_bug 0x7: &4: 0x0-0x0 no error
hdc: MWDMA2 mode selected
FJP: id_dma_bug 0x2: &2: 0x0-0x0 no error <-------------
hdd: MWDMA2 mode selected
So it seems to me that in 2.6.26 something was broken in the way these ID
fields were handled, at least in this check. This is now fixed (possibly
by the changes around 5b90e990..48fb2688) and *that* causes the
regression. Note that the hard disks are also affected.

If I'm correct I guess that supports Bart's patch to just remove the whole
thing. But did this only affect the id_dma_bug check or also the use of
these fields elsewhere?

Cheers,
FJP

[1] I don't have a crossbuild environment for sparc, so a bisect would be
painful with 300MHz; I at least have plenty memory luckily.

int ide_id_dma_bug(ide_drive_t *drive)
{
u16 *id = drive->id;
printk("FJP: id_dma_bug 0x%x:", id[ATA_ID_FIELD_VALID]);
if (id[ATA_ID_FIELD_VALID] & 4) {
printk(" &4: 0x%x-0x%x", (id[ATA_ID_UDMA_MODES] >> 8),
(id[ATA_ID_MWDMA_MODES] >> 8));
if ((id[ATA_ID_UDMA_MODES] >> 8) &&
(id[ATA_ID_MWDMA_MODES] >> 8)) {
printk(" bad modes");
goto err_out;
}
} else if (id[ATA_ID_FIELD_VALID] & 2) {
printk(" &2: 0x%x-0x%x", (id[ATA_ID_MWDMA_MODES] >> 8),
(id[ATA_ID_SWDMA_MODES] >> 8));
if ((id[ATA_ID_MWDMA_MODES] >> 8) &&
(id[ATA_ID_SWDMA_MODES] >> 8)) {
printk(" bad modes");
goto err_out;
}
}
printk(" no error\n");
return 0;
err_out:
printk("\n");
printk(KERN_ERR "%s: bad DMA info in identify block\n",
drive->name);
return 1;
}

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-23 17:01    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site