HEADS UP: Check your devices' UDMA settings -- ADDENDUM

[Basil Chupin]

On 06/04/2011 00:11, J wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:07, Basil Chupin<blchupin at iinet.net.au>  wrote:
>> On 05/04/2011 15:51, Basil Chupin wrote:
>>> It appears that Bug #195221 has suddenly come back -- see
>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/195221.
>>>
>>> This bug re-appeared on 1 April (my time, Australia, East Coast) because
>>> the previous day my logs showed that the UDMAs were being set correctly. The
>>> only thing which I can see is that on 1 April there was a kernel firmware
>>> upgrade but as I know nuffin' about kernels (or majors or even captains)
>>> this upgrade may have nothing to do with it.
>>>
>>> What the above Bug is about is that even though your HDD, for example, can
>>> do UDMA 133 the UDMA in fact gets set to UDMA 33 because some check
>>> concludes incorrectly that the device is connected with a 40-wire cable.
>>> Here is an example I just took from my dmesg log file:
>>>
>>> (the ata1 refers to the HDD/CDROM I have on the first PATA line and ata2
>>> refers to the HDD/DVDRW on line #2)
>>>
>>> [ 1.476324] ata1.00: ATA-8: WDC WD5000AAKB-00H8A0, 05.04E05, max UDMA/133
>>> <=======XXXXXXXXXXXXX
>>> [ 1.476327] ata1.00: 976773168 sectors, multi 16: LBA48
>>> [ 1.476359] ata1.01: ATAPI: HL-DT-STDVD-ROM GDR8164B, 0L06, max UDMA/33
>>> <=======XXXXXXXXXXXXX
>>> [ 1.476384] ata1: nv_mode_filter: 0x7f39f&0x7f39f->0x7f39f, BIOS=0x7f000
>>> (0xc7c0c6c6) ACPI=0x7f01f (15:60:0x1f)
>>> [ 1.476391] ata1: nv_mode_filter: 0x739f&0x739f->0x739f, BIOS=0x7000
>>> (0xc7c0c6c6) ACPI=0x701f (15:60:0x1f)
>>> [ 1.492585] ata1.00: configured for UDMA/133<=======XXXXXXXXXXXXX
>>> [ 1.508263] ata1.01: configured for UDMA/33<=======XXXXXXXXXXXXX
>>> ......................................................
>>>
>>> [ 1.884316] ata2.00: HPA unlocked: 312579695 ->  312581808, native
>>> 312581808
>>> [ 1.884322] ata2.00: ATA-7: ST3160215A, 3.AAD, max UDMA/100
>>> <========ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
>>> [ 1.884326] ata2.00: 312581808 sectors, multi 16: LBA48
>>> [ 1.884356] ata2.01: ATAPI: PIONEER DVD-RW DVR-118L, 1.02, max UDMA/100
>>> <========ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
>>> [ 1.884382] ata2: nv_mode_filter: 0x3f39f&0x3f39f->0x3f39f, BIOS=0x3f000
>>> (0xc7c0c6c6) ACPI=0x3f01f (20:20:0x1f)
>>> [ 1.884386] ata2.00: limited to UDMA/33 due to 40-wire cable
>>> <========!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>> [ 1.884391] ata2: nv_mode_filter: 0x3f39f&0x3f39f->0x3f39f, BIOS=0x3f000
>>> (0xc7c0c6c6) ACPI=0x3f01f (20:20:0x1f)
>>> [ 1.884394] ata2.01: limited to UDMA/33 due to 40-wire cable
>>> <========!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>> [ 1.896098] firewire_core: created device fw0: GUID 00e0180000402cfe, S400
>>> [ 1.930139] ata2.00: configured for UDMA/33<========@!@!@!@!@!@!
>>> [ 1.944263] ata2.01: configured for UDMA/33<========@!@!@!@!@!@!
>>> [ 1.944792] scsi 1:0:0:0: Direct-Access ATA ST3160215A 3.AA PQ: 0 ANSI: 5
>>> [ 1.944935] sd 1:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg2 type 0
>>> [ 1.947782] sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] 312581808 512-byte logical blocks: (160
>>> GB/149 GiB)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Now, you may not be affected in this way but it would pay to check.
>>>
>>> I haven't read all what is needed to fix this problem - there is a
>>> workaround but requires a patch, or something, to the kernel and I ain't too
>>> damn keen to do this considering that all was OK until beginning of 1 April.
>>>
>>> BC
>> I just finished installing openSUSE 11.4. It is using kernel 2.36.37.1-1.2
>> and this is also showing that my system has a 40-wire cable on line #2 when
>> it is, and has been for years, an 80-wire cable (and I replaced it 2 days
>> ago with a new one just in case). So it appears that there has been a
>> regression in the kernel.
>>
>> BC
> Interesting... good catch.  What's the number of the bug you filed?  I
> can't seem to find it.  The one you reference as the original was last
> commented on in 2009.

That's the one - after being marked as resolved it has come back after 2 
years to bite us all again.

But if you look around you will find that it goes back to at least 2007.

BC

PS Oh, I misread your post. I haven't filed any bug report. Saw no 
reason to as it is already a known thing but which had been resolved way 
back.

-- 
Any experiment in life will be at your own experience.