[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Bogus LBA48 drives
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2004, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>Andries Brouwer wrote:
>>>Hmm. I read in my copy of ATA7:
>>> 6.16.55 Words (103:100): Maximum user LBA for 48-bit Address feature set
>>> Words (103:100) contain a value that is one greater than the maximum LBA
>>> in user accessable space when the 48-bit Addressing feature set is supported.
>>> The maximum value that shall be placed in this field is 0000FFFFFFFFFFFFh.
>>> Support of these words is mandatory if the 48-bit Address feature set is supported.
>>>Do you read differently?
>>The errata is, one needs to check that field for zero, and use the other
>>one if so...
> Which is not sufficient for `my' drives, since I get disk errors if I just use
> the other capacity field and don't disable LBA48 completely.
> I'll check the ATA specs myself, if I find some time...

If it's reporting the "48-bit feature set supported" but doesn't really
support it, I'd vote for broken drive :) Maybe check for a firmware
update on the manufacturer's web site?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.024 / U:0.756 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site