Showstopper ATA bug in 6.1-PRE?

[Wilko Bulte]

On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 03:45:53PM +0100, Sren Schmidt wrote..
> Wilko Bulte wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 03:37:07PM +0100, Sren Schmidt wrote..
> >>Wilko Bulte wrote:
> >>>On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 10:44:05PM +0100, Sren Schmidt wrote..
> >>>>Wilko Bulte wrote:
> >>>>>On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 10:02:08PM +0100, Sren Schmidt wrote..
> >>>>>>Wilko Bulte wrote:
> >>>>>>>Hi Soren,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>I just went to 6.1-PRE on my main machine, coming from 6.0-STABLE
> >>>>>>>of roughly end of december.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>And I hit some stuff that really worries me:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>- the freshly built kernel keels over with (hand transcribed):
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>ata3: reiniting channel SATA connect ... 
> >>>>>>>SATA connected
> >>>>>>>sata_connect_devices 0x1 <ATA_MASTER>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>ad6: req=0xC35ba0c8 SETFEATURES SETTRANSFERMODE semaphore timeout 
> >>>>>>>!! DANGER Will RObinson !!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>(... is where I cannot read my own handwriting, it scrolled quite 
> >>>>>>>fast on
> >>>>>>>the screen..)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Boot device is a SATA RAID1 on a Promise 2300.
> >>>>>>Hmm, that should not happen. Could you try to backstep just ATA to 
> >>>>>>before the MFC, that is 24/1/06 and let me know if that helps please ?
> >>>>>First impression is that the problem is gone.  None of the previously 
> >>>>>reported errors are seen.  I am running a level 0 dump from disk to 
> >>>>>disk
> >>>>>to see if the box remains stable.  Given that this is my primary 
> >>>>>machine
> >>>>>I sure hope it will be :-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>Another snag is that my ad10 disk on 6.0-STABLE suddenly became ad12 
> >>>>>>>on
> >>>>>>>6.1-PRE
> >>>>>>Hmm that is because there is only 2 ports on your promise which is 
> >>>>>>now correctly identified, before it was errounsly found as 3 ports.
> >>>>>Ah, OK.  I would suggest a note to the Release Note writers would be a 
> >>>>>good
> >>>>>thing, devices changing location after an upgrade in the -stable branch
> >>>>>is unnerving ;-)
> >>>>Well, the good thing is that I can reproduce the error here, the bad 
> >>>>thing is that it slipped through testing on -current...
> >>>>Oh, well, I'll look into it ASAP...
> >>>Thank you Soren!
> >>OK, had a few this afternoon, could you try this patch and let me know 
> >>if it helps, at least it makes the problem go away on my testbed..
> >
> >Is this relative to HEAD or RELENG_6?  I cannot / will not go to HEAD
> >with this machine (my main production box.. :-)
> 
> Doesn't matter, ATA is the same on both...

OK, I was not sure if they were 100% identical.

The patch at first impression seems to have eliminated the problem.

Interestingly enough ad10 remained ad10 with the patch applied?

I'll put some load on to see what happens.

-- 
Wilko Bulte				wilko at FreeBSD.org