Andrew Lyon wrote:
> Is there anything more I can do to assist? I plan to upgrade to
> 2.6.19/latest at the weekend, let me know if there is anything more i
> can do.
WD740ADFD-00 is blacklisted for NCQ in .20-rcX kernels, so you won't see
the problem anymore there. If you're gonna use 2.6.19, yo
bbee wrote:
> Sorry, I thought you meant you would need to update it *further*. I
> applied the patch you gave to Andrew with this result so far:
>
> $ dmesg | grep -A1 "spurious interrupt"
> ata1: spurious interrupt (irq_stat 0x8 active_tag 0xfafbfcfd sactive 0x0)
> ata1: issue=0x0 SAct=0x0 SDB_F
On 1/3/07, bbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Tejun Heo wrote:
> bbee wrote:
>>> Yeap, I have major issues with SDB FISes which contains spurious
>>> completions but most other spurious interrupts shouldn't be dangerous
>>> and I haven't seen spurious completions for quite some t
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Tejun Heo wrote:
bbee wrote:
Yeap, I have major issues with SDB FISes which contains spurious
completions but most other spurious interrupts shouldn't be dangerous
and I haven't seen spurious completions for quite some time, so I was
thinking either removing the message or pr
-- Forwarded message --
From: Andrew Lyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Jan 3, 2007 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: ata1: spurious interrupt (irq_stat 0x8 active_tag
-84148995 sactive 0x0) r0xj0
To: bbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On 1/3/07, bbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed,
bbee wrote:
>> Yeap, I have major issues with SDB FISes which contains spurious
>> completions but most other spurious interrupts shouldn't be dangerous
>> and I haven't seen spurious completions for quite some time, so I was
>> thinking either removing the message or printing it only on SDB FIS
>>
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Tejun Heo wrote:
bbee wrote:
Tejun Heo gmail.com> writes:
Andrew Lyon wrote:
ata1: spurious interrupt (irq_stat 0x8 active_tag -84148995 sactive 0x0)
Is this condition dangerous?
Not usually. Might indicate something is going wrong in some really
rare cases. I think ve
[cc'ing linux-ide]
bbee wrote:
> Tejun Heo gmail.com> writes:
>> Andrew Lyon wrote:
>>> My system is gigabyte ds3 motherboard with onboard SATA JMicron
>>> 20360/20363 AHCI Controller (rev 02), drive connected is WDC
>>> WD740ADFD-00 20.0, I am running 2.6.18.6 32 bit, under heavy i/o I get
>>> t
Tejun Heo gmail.com> writes:
> Andrew Lyon wrote:
> > My system is gigabyte ds3 motherboard with onboard SATA JMicron
> > 20360/20363 AHCI Controller (rev 02), drive connected is WDC
> > WD740ADFD-00 20.0, I am running 2.6.18.6 32 bit, under heavy i/o I get
> > the following messaegs:
> >
> > ata
On 12/28/06, Tejun Heo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew Lyon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My system is gigabyte ds3 motherboard with onboard SATA JMicron
> 20360/20363 AHCI Controller (rev 02), drive connected is WDC
> WD740ADFD-00 20.0, I am running 2.6.18.6 32 bit, under heavy i/o I get
> the following me
Andrew Lyon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My system is gigabyte ds3 motherboard with onboard SATA JMicron
> 20360/20363 AHCI Controller (rev 02), drive connected is WDC
> WD740ADFD-00 20.0, I am running 2.6.18.6 32 bit, under heavy i/o I get
> the following messaegs:
>
> ata1: spurious interrupt (irq_stat 0x8
Hi,
My system is gigabyte ds3 motherboard with onboard SATA JMicron
20360/20363 AHCI Controller (rev 02), drive connected is WDC
WD740ADFD-00 20.0, I am running 2.6.18.6 32 bit, under heavy i/o I get
the following messaegs:
ata1: spurious interrupt (irq_stat 0x8 active_tag -84148995 sactive 0x0)
12 matches
Mail list logo