kern/91408 : [irq] ata(4) failure: SETFEATURES SET TRANSFER
MODE semaphore timeout !! DANGER Will Robinson !!
John Baldwin
jhb at freebsd.org
Mon May 1 19:20:29 UTC 2006
The following reply was made to PR kern/91408; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: John Baldwin <jhb at freebsd.org>
To: Eugene Grosbein <eugen at grosbein.pp.ru>
Cc: bug-followup at freebsd.org, lightsquid at logvinov.com
Subject: Re: kern/91408 : [irq] ata(4) failure: SETFEATURES SET TRANSFER MODE semaphore timeout !! DANGER Will Robinson !!
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 15:17:06 -0400
On Sunday 30 April 2006 04:44, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 10:54:09PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> > > With 6.1-RC of today I have the same sympthoms as with 5.4-RELEASE
> > > (http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/80815):
> > >
> > > 1) machine suffers from ATA timeouts if ACPI is fully enabled;
> > > 2) debug.acpi.disable="pci_link" in /boot/loader.conf eliminates the
> > > problem.
> > >
> > > So, Soren seems to be right: this is interrupt routing problem
> > > and not ATA problem.
> > >
> > > The question is: should I consider the workaround mentioned above as
> > > solution? What will I miss if I keep debug.acpi.disable="pci_link" forever?
> >
> > I think it's dangerous
>
> What kind of trouble I am "asking for" while using debug.acpi.disable="pci_link"?
Because ACPI is rather intertwined, so it is expecting to tell the OS how to
route interrupts in a certain way, and if you enable ACPI the BIOS is expecting
you to use it completely.
> > and that you should just disable ACPI altogether if you wish to do that.
>
> I think I do not wish that :-)
Do so at your own risk then.
> This machive has four OS now: FreeBSD 4.11-RELEASE (uses APM to turn power off),
> Windows 98SE and Windows XP SP2 (use ACPI, no problems with it).
>
> Would I be allowed to turn power off with 6.1 without ACPI enabled?
> Would it be possible not only for 'shutdown -p', but for ACPI power button too?
No, the power button only works with ACPI. shutdown -p can work using apm
as on 4.x.
> > Can you provide verbose dmesg's for the
> > case with pci_link disabled and the case where it is not disabled?
>
> Here comes dmesg.acpi (ACPI is fully enabled):
Well, all the IRQs are the same and none of the interrupts were changed to
be edge triggered or anything like that, so it's not a problem with
interrupt routing. If the interrupt routing were busted, the IRQ numbers
would be different. All the pci_link devices do is help the OS figure out
which IRQ number a device uses. If those numbers are all the same, then
interrupt routing is not the issue.
--
John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
More information about the freebsd-bugs
mailing list