On 9/18/2013 5:27 PM, Bruce Link wrote: > On 9/17/2013 8:40 PM, Robert Hancock wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Bruce Link wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 07:53:49PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote: >>>>>> Is there any more information I can supply that would be helpful? >>>>> I'm not quite sure what the next step would be. It's quite possible >>>>> that the NVIDIA driver in Windows is doing some magic to work around >>>>> the problem that we don't know about, but it's hard to say what that >>>>> might be. The fact that the default drivers used in the WinPE boot >>>>> don't seem to work would tend to point toward some kind of hardware >>>>> incompatibility issue. >>>>> >>>>> Tejun, think you poked with some of this stuff before - any ideas? >>>> It has been years since I looked at MCP quirks, of which there are too >>>> many. It's likely another quirk on the controller side that nvidia >>>> worked around somehow without telling anyone. Given the history and >>>> that nvidia is out of chipset market, I think it's highly unlikely to >>>> learn what the issue and workaround are without reverse engineering >>>> it. So, um, no idea. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> tejun >>>> -- >>> >>> Robert, >>> >>> I've inquired about this problem with Allen Martin at Nvidia, he had >>> the >>> following reply: >>> >>> /--------SNIP---------------/ >>> Hi Bruce, I did work on the Windows SATA driver for those chipsets, >>> so I’m >>> familiar with it. I’m not aware of any of any timing workarounds for >>> any >>> devices in the driver, but it’s certainly true that there are >>> devices that >>> have timing sensitivity, especially around the IDENTIFY command and >>> it may >>> inadvertently work with one driver and not another. >>> >>> From the bug reports it looks like it’s always timing out on a >>> TEST_UNIT_READY command? I assume this is probably the first command >>> sent >>> down after IDENTIFY to check for presense of a CD in the drive? If >>> so it’s >>> likely the drive is locked up and any command at that point will >>> fail. If >>> you want to test out the theory about it being a timing issue, I >>> would stick >>> some udelay()s in the identify code path, both before and after >>> starting the >>> transfer to see if it makes any difference. Also do you know if the >>> driver >>> does a PHY reset when it resets the link? If not, you can try doing >>> that by >>> writing a 0 to SControl and then restoring it with the original value. >>> >>> Hope this helps, >>> >>> -Allen >>> /--------SNIP---------------/ >>> >>> Does this provide any actionable information? I've tried searching >>> for the >>> proper location to impliment these delays in the sata_nv.c and >>> libata-eh.c >>> files but admittedly, am in over my head. >> Don't think there's any earth-shaking revelations but it might be a >> few things to try. First, though, apparently there is a firmware >> update for this drive of at least one revision up (WL0G) available >> from Lite-ON that you could try updating to. (You'll likely need to >> use Windows for that.) Given that it seems broken in at least two >> different environments on this controller, it's possible they fixed >> something related in the drive. > Robert, > > I can report that the new firmware for the drive does not solve the > problem. > > watchtv@teevee:~$ dmesg |grep ata5 > [ 1.090360] ata5: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x9e0 ctl 0xbe0 bmdma > 0xc400 irq 20 > [ 1.556044] ata5: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) > [ 1.564199] ata5.00: ATAPI: ATAPI iHOS104, WL0G, max UDMA/100 > [ 1.580140] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/100 > [ 6.580035] ata5.00: qc timeout (cmd 0xa0) > [ 6.580043] ata5.00: TEST_UNIT_READY failed (err_mask=0x4) > [ 7.048042] ata5: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) > [ 7.072124] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/100 > [ 12.072029] ata5.00: qc timeout (cmd 0xa0) > [ 12.072037] ata5.00: TEST_UNIT_READY failed (err_mask=0x4) > [ 12.072041] ata5: limiting SATA link speed to 1.5 Gbps > [ 12.072043] ata5.00: limiting speed to UDMA/100:PIO3 > [ 12.540058] ata5: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) > [ 12.564141] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/100 > [ 17.564038] ata5.00: qc timeout (cmd 0xa0) > [ 17.564045] ata5.00: TEST_UNIT_READY failed (err_mask=0x4) > [ 17.564048] ata5.00: disabled > [ 17.564063] ata5: hard resetting link > [ 17.564065] ata5: nv: skipping hardreset on occupied port > [ 18.032068] ata5: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300) > [ 18.032082] ata5: EH complete > watchtv@teevee:~$ > > My apologies for not noticing the firmware update earlier. I do recall > checking at one time, though it may have been prior to Sept. 2011. > > Bruce Robert, Writing to you to bump this thread. Is there anything more I can do to troubleshoot this issue? Thanks Bruce