On Wed, Mar 01 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >For libata, I think an ATA_FLAG_NO_FUA would be appropriate for
> >situations like this... assume FUA is supported in the controller, and
> >set a flag where it is not. Most chips will support FUA, either by
> >design or by sheer luck. The ones that do not support FUA are the
> >controllers that snoop the ATA command opcode, and internally choose the
> >protocol based on that opcode. For such hardware, unknown opcodes will
> >inevitably cause problems.
>
> This also begs the question... what controller was being used, when the
> single Maxtor device listed in the blacklist was added? Perhaps it was
> a problem with the controller, not the device.
Yeah which explains it a lot better as well... The FUA drive problem
never made much sense to me.
--
Jens Axboe
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
