On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:43:38PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Joerg Sommrey wrote: > >On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:07:16PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > >>Joerg Sommrey wrote: > >> > >>>On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:10:14AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Joerg Sommrey wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 11:09:26PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>Joerg Sommrey wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 05:43:59PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Joerg Sommrey wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Patch: > >>>>>>>>>>http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/jgarzik/libata/2.6.11-rc5-bk4-libata-dev1.patch.bz2 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Still not usable here. The same errors as before when backing up: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Please try 2.6.11 without any patches. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Plain 2.6.11 doesn't work either. All of 2.6.10-ac11, 2.6.11-rc5, > >>>>>>>2.6.11-rc5 + 2.6.11-rc5-bk4-libata-dev1.patch and 2.6.11 fail with > >>>>>>>the > >>>>>>>same symptoms. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Reverting to stable 2.6.10-ac8 :-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Does reverting the attached patch in 2.6.11 (apply with patch -R) fix > >>>>>>things? > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>Still the same with this patch reverted. > >>>> > >>>>Does reverting the attached patch in 2.6.11 fix things? (apply with > >>>>patch -R) > >>>> > >>>>This patch reverts the entire libata back to 2.6.10. > >>>> > >>> > >>>I'm confused. Still the same with everything reverted. What shall I do > >>>now? > >> > >>Well, first, thanks for your patience in narrowing this down. > >> > >>This means we have eliminated libata as a problem source, but we still > >>have the rest of the kernel go to through :) > >> > >>Try disabling ACPI with 'acpi=off' or 'pci=biosirq' to see if that fixes > >>things. > >> > > > >I tried both settings with plain 2.6.11. Almost the same results, in my > >impression apci=off causes the failure to appear even faster. > > Just to make sure I have things right, please tell me if this is correct: > > * 2.6.10 vanilla works > > * 2.6.11 vanilla does not work > > * 2.6.11 vanilla + 2.6.10 libata does not work > [2.6.10 libata == reverting all libata changes] > > Is that all correct?
Thanks for asking these precise questions. After double-checking everything I found a typo in my configuration that changes things a bit. I repeated some tests and the correct answers are now: * 2.6.10 vanilla works * 2.6.10-ac8 works * 2.6.10-ac11 does not work * 2.6.11 vanilla does not work * 2.6.11 w/o promise.patch does not work * 2.6.11 + 2.6.10 libata works! This looks much more consistent to me but brings the case back to libata. -jo -- -rw-r--r-- 1 jo users 63 2005-03-04 22:48 /home/jo/.signature - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
