[lkml]   [2009]   [Feb]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] libata: Don't trust current capacity values in identify words 57-58
    Mark Lord wrote:
    > Robert Hancock wrote:
    >> Hanno Böck reported a problem where an old Conner CP30254 240MB hard
    >> drive
    >> was reported as 1.1TB in capacity by libata:
    >> This was caused by libata trusting the drive's reported current
    >> capacity in sectors in identify words 57 and 58 if the drive does not
    >> support LBA and the
    >> current CHS translation values appear valid. Unfortunately it seems older
    >> ATA specs were vague about what this field should contain and a number
    >> of drives
    >> used values with wrong byte order or that were totally bogus. There's no
    >> unique information that it conveys and so we can just calculate the
    >> number
    >> of sectors from the reported current CHS values.
    >> Signed-off-by: Robert Hancock <>
    > ..
    >> } else {
    >> if (ata_id_current_chs_valid(id))
    >> - return ata_id_u32(id, 57);
    >> + return id[54] * id[55] * id[56];
    >> else
    >> return id[1] * id[3] * id[6];
    > ..
    > NAK. That's not quite correct, either.
    > The LBA capacity can be larger than the CHS capacity,
    > so we have to use the reported LBA values if at all possible.
    > That's why ata_id_is_lba_capacity_ok() exists,
    > and why it looks so peculiar.
    > Some of those early drives really did require that kind of logic.

    This is the !ata_id_has_lba code path. If the drive supports LBA then
    the LBA capacity will always be used, that hasn't changed.
    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: 2009-02-18 12:23    [W:0.023 / U:3.148 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site