Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Gregory Nowak]

Hi Vic,

Yeah, I'd say also to check if you have ultra dma 
support in your kernel.
Greg


On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 10:44:19PM -0100, Victor Tsaran wrote:
Content-Description: message body text
> Hello, listers!
> I hope those of you who are experts in kernel bugs or interaction of kernel
> with the hardware can help me with this. Since I installed Redhat 7.1 I
> started to get the messages that RedHat cannot communicate through DMA with
> my hard drives. I know for sure that my hard drives can communicate through
> DMA, plus I was never getting similar messages before. Shon suggested for
> me to check whether UltraDMA support was compiled into my kernel, but I,
> firstly, do not understand why it should be included into kernel, and
> secondly, why would Redhat ignore including UltraDMA support in the first
> place.
> Iam therefore attaching the complete log from the messages buffer ring
> produced by the `dmesg' command.
> Please let me know if you have any idea and where should I look for
> possible solutions.
> WIndows 2000 is very happy about my drives, whereas Linux complains about
> them. However, after kernel disables DMA transfer mode, it goes pretty
> fine. Please ignore any messages about SWAP...
> Best and thanks in advance,
> Vic

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Kirk Wood]

First, understand why Windows 2000 doesn't complain about the DMA. If the
drive times out twice (ever) then it no longer uses DMA ever. So it won't
complain. It won't tell you. In fact, win winclows 98 they burried any
indication that this had happened. It happens more often them many people
realize.

Having said that, if you didn't have DMA support compiled into the kernel
you wouldn't get the errors. Yes, it must be compiled in if it is to be
used. (DMA falls back to PIO in case of failure and PIO always remains
available.)

As for fixing this, it is either the motherboard or the drive. I know that
doesn't help. You might check to see that DMA is turned on in the
BIOS. (Linux will try anyway, winblows just acts like it is using DMA and
doesn't really.) Otherwise try another DMA drive and see if the problem
resolves.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Victor Tsaran]

Hi, Kirk!
That sheds some light. I will probably end up downloading a diag diskette
for Western Digital drives and see whether they detect DMA capabilities. OK,
if it turns out that I was fooled by Windows during all this time, do you
know of any parameter which I could use to tell Linux to fall to PIO mode
right away?
Best,
Victor

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirk Wood" <cpt.kirk@1tree.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors


> First, understand why Windows 2000 doesn't complain about the DMA. If the
> drive times out twice (ever) then it no longer uses DMA ever. So it won't
> complain. It won't tell you. In fact, win winclows 98 they burried any
> indication that this had happened. It happens more often them many people
> realize.
>
> Having said that, if you didn't have DMA support compiled into the kernel
> you wouldn't get the errors. Yes, it must be compiled in if it is to be
> used. (DMA falls back to PIO in case of failure and PIO always remains
> available.)
>
> As for fixing this, it is either the motherboard or the drive. I know that
> doesn't help. You might check to see that DMA is turned on in the
> BIOS. (Linux will try anyway, winblows just acts like it is using DMA and
> doesn't really.) Otherwise try another DMA drive and see if the problem
> resolves.
>
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
>
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Victor Tsaran]

[-- Attachment #1: message body text --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1030 bytes --]

Hello, listers!
I hope those of you who are experts in kernel bugs or interaction of kernel
with the hardware can help me with this. Since I installed Redhat 7.1 I
started to get the messages that RedHat cannot communicate through DMA with
my hard drives. I know for sure that my hard drives can communicate through
DMA, plus I was never getting similar messages before. Shon suggested for
me to check whether UltraDMA support was compiled into my kernel, but I,
firstly, do not understand why it should be included into kernel, and
secondly, why would Redhat ignore including UltraDMA support in the first
place.
Iam therefore attaching the complete log from the messages buffer ring
produced by the `dmesg' command.
Please let me know if you have any idea and where should I look for
possible solutions.
WIndows 2000 is very happy about my drives, whereas Linux complains about
them. However, after kernel disables DMA transfer mode, it goes pretty
fine. Please ignore any messages about SWAP...
Best and thanks in advance,
Vic

[-- Attachment #2: output --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 7093 bytes --]

Linux version 2.4.2-2 (root@porky.devel.redhat.com) (gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.1 2.96-79)) #1 Sun Apr 8 20:41:30 EDT 2001
BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
 BIOS-e820: 000000000009fc00 @ 0000000000000000 (usable)
 BIOS-e820: 0000000000000400 @ 000000000009fc00 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 0000000000010000 @ 00000000000f0000 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 0000000003efd000 @ 0000000000100000 (usable)
 BIOS-e820: 0000000000002000 @ 0000000003ffd000 (ACPI data)
 BIOS-e820: 0000000000001000 @ 0000000003fff000 (ACPI NVS)
 BIOS-e820: 0000000000010000 @ 00000000ffff0000 (reserved)
On node 0 totalpages: 16381
zone(0): 4096 pages.
zone DMA has max 32 cached pages.
zone(1): 12285 pages.
zone Normal has max 95 cached pages.
zone(2): 0 pages.
zone HighMem has max 1 cached pages.
Kernel command line: root=/dev/hdb4 BOOT_IMAGE=vmlinuz auto
Initializing CPU#0
Detected 350.800 MHz processor.
Console: colour VGA+ 80x25
Calibrating delay loop... 699.59 BogoMIPS
Memory: 62020k/65524k available (1365k kernel code, 3116k reserved, 92k data, 236k init, 0k highmem)
Dentry-cache hash table entries: 8192 (order: 4, 65536 bytes)
Buffer-cache hash table entries: 1024 (order: 0, 4096 bytes)
Page-cache hash table entries: 16384 (order: 5, 131072 bytes)
Inode-cache hash table entries: 4096 (order: 3, 32768 bytes)
VFS: Diskquotas version dquot_6.5.0 initialized
CPU: Before vendor init, caps: 0183f9ff 00000000 00000000, vendor = 0
CPU: L1 I cache: 16K, L1 D cache: 16K
CPU: L2 cache: 512K
Intel machine check architecture supported.
Intel machine check reporting enabled on CPU#0.
CPU: After vendor init, caps: 0183f9ff 00000000 00000000 00000000
CPU: After generic, caps: 0183f9ff 00000000 00000000 00000000
CPU: Common caps: 0183f9ff 00000000 00000000 00000000
CPU: Intel Pentium II (Deschutes) stepping 02
Enabling fast FPU save and restore... done.
Checking 'hlt' instruction... OK.
POSIX conformance testing by UNIFIX
mtrr: v1.37 (20001109) Richard Gooch (rgooch@atnf.csiro.au)
mtrr: detected mtrr type: Intel
PCI: PCI BIOS revision 2.10 entry at 0xf0720, last bus=1
PCI: Using configuration type 1
PCI: Probing PCI hardware
Unknown bridge resource 0: assuming transparent
PCI: Using IRQ router PIIX [8086/7110] at 00:04.0
Limiting direct PCI/PCI transfers.
isapnp: Scanning for PnP cards...
isapnp: No Plug & Play device found
Linux NET4.0 for Linux 2.4
Based upon Swansea University Computer Society NET3.039
Initializing RT netlink socket
apm: BIOS version 1.2 Flags 0x03 (Driver version 1.14)
Starting kswapd v1.8
pty: 256 Unix98 ptys configured
block: queued sectors max/low 41096kB/13698kB, 128 slots per queue
RAMDISK driver initialized: 16 RAM disks of 4096K size 1024 blocksize
Uniform Multi-Platform E-IDE driver Revision: 6.31
ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes; override with idebus=xx
PIIX4: IDE controller on PCI bus 00 dev 21
PIIX4: chipset revision 1
PIIX4: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later
    ide0: BM-DMA at 0xd800-0xd807, BIOS settings: hda:DMA, hdb:DMA
    ide1: BM-DMA at 0xd808-0xd80f, BIOS settings: hdc:DMA, hdd:DMA
hda: WDC WD205BA, ATA DISK drive
hdb: WDC WD101BA, ATA DISK drive
hdc: ASUS CD-S400/A, ATAPI CD/DVD-ROM drive
hdd: Hewlett-Packard CD-Writer Plus 9300, ATAPI CD/DVD-ROM drive
ide0 at 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6 on irq 14
ide1 at 0x170-0x177,0x376 on irq 15
hda: 40088160 sectors (20525 MB) w/2048KiB Cache, CHS=2495/255/63, UDMA(33)
hdb: 19746720 sectors (10110 MB) w/1961KiB Cache, CHS=1229/255/63, UDMA(33)
Partition check:
 hda:hda: status error: status=0x01 { Error }
hda: status error: error=0x04 { DriveStatusError }
hda: drive not ready for command
 hda1 hda2 < hda5 >
 hdb:hdb: timeout waiting for DMA
ide_dmaproc: chipset supported ide_dma_timeout func only: 14
hdb: irq timeout: status=0x58 { DriveReady SeekComplete DataRequest }
hdb: timeout waiting for DMA
ide_dmaproc: chipset supported ide_dma_timeout func only: 14
hdb: irq timeout: status=0x58 { DriveReady SeekComplete DataRequest }
hdb: timeout waiting for DMA
ide_dmaproc: chipset supported ide_dma_timeout func only: 14
hdb: irq timeout: status=0x58 { DriveReady SeekComplete DataRequest }
hdb: timeout waiting for DMA
ide_dmaproc: chipset supported ide_dma_timeout func only: 14
hdb: irq timeout: status=0x58 { DriveReady SeekComplete DataRequest }
hda: DMA disabled
hdb: DMA disabled
ide0: reset: success
 hdb1 hdb2 hdb4
Floppy drive(s): fd0 is 1.44M
FDC 0 is a post-1991 82077
Serial driver version 5.02 (2000-08-09) with MANY_PORTS MULTIPORT SHARE_IRQ SERIAL_PCI ISAPNP enabled
ttyS00 at 0x03f8 (irq = 4) is a 16550A
ttyS01 at 0x02f8 (irq = 3) is a 16550A
ttyS03 at 0x02e8 (irq = 3) is a 16550A
Real Time Clock Driver v1.10d
md driver 0.90.0 MAX_MD_DEVS=256, MD_SB_DISKS=27
md.c: sizeof(mdp_super_t) = 4096
autodetecting RAID arrays
autorun ...
... autorun DONE.
NET4: Linux TCP/IP 1.0 for NET4.0
IP Protocols: ICMP, UDP, TCP, IGMP
IP: routing cache hash table of 512 buckets, 4Kbytes
TCP: Hash tables configured (established 4096 bind 4096)
Linux IP multicast router 0.06 plus PIM-SM
NET4: Unix domain sockets 1.0/SMP for Linux NET4.0.
VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem) readonly.
Freeing unused kernel memory: 236k freed
Swap area shorter than signature indicates
Swap area shorter than signature indicates
Winbond Super-IO detection, now testing ports 3F0,370,250,4E,2E ...
Winbond chip at EFER=0x3f0 key=0x87 devid=97 devrev=73 oldid=ff
Winbond chip type 83977TF / SMSC 97w33x/97w34x
Winbond LPT Config: cr_30=01 60,61=0378 70=07 74=03, f0=3b
Winbond LPT Config: active=yes, io=0x0378 irq=7, dma=3
Winbond LPT Config: irqtype=pulsed low, high-Z, ECP fifo threshold=7
Winbond LPT Config: Port mode=ECP and EPP-1.9
SMSC Super-IO detection, now testing Ports 2F0, 370 ...
0x378: FIFO is 16 bytes
0x378: writeIntrThreshold is 9
0x378: readIntrThreshold is 9
0x378: PWord is 8 bits
0x378: Interrupts are ISA-Pulses
0x378: ECP port cfgA=0x10 cfgB=0x48
0x378: ECP settings irq=7 dma=<none or set by other means>
parport0: PC-style at 0x378 (0x778) [PCSPP,TRISTATE,COMPAT,EPP,ECP]
parport0: irq 7 detected
parport0: cpp_daisy: aa5500ff(38)
parport0: assign_addrs: aa5500ff(38)
parport0: cpp_daisy: aa5500ff(38)
parport0: assign_addrs: aa5500ff(38)
ip_conntrack (511 buckets, 4088 max)
ne2k-pci.c:v1.02 10/19/2000 D. Becker/P. Gortmaker
  http://www.scyld.com/network/ne2k-pci.html
PCI: Found IRQ 11 for device 00:0c.0
eth0: RealTek RTL-8029 found at 0xb000, IRQ 11, 52:54:00:E4:E3:4C.
NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out
eth0: Tx timed out, cable problem? TSR=0x2, ISR=0x0, t=103.
NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out
eth0: Tx timed out, cable problem? TSR=0x2, ISR=0x0, t=303.
NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out
eth0: Tx timed out, cable problem? TSR=0x2, ISR=0x0, t=102.
hda: status error: status=0x01 { Error }
hda: status error: error=0x04 { DriveStatusError }
hda: drive not ready for command
hda: status error: status=0x01 { Error }
hda: status error: error=0x04 { DriveStatusError }
hda: drive not ready for command
hda: status error: status=0x01 { Error }
hda: status error: error=0x04 { DriveStatusError }
hda: drive not ready for command

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Victor Tsaran]

But why UltraDMA? Are DMA and UltraDMA much different from each other?
Vic

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gregory Nowak" <romualt@megsinet.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 11:16 PM
Subject: Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors


> Hi Vic,
>
> Yeah, I'd say also to check if you have ultra dma
> support in your kernel.
> Greg
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 10:44:19PM -0100, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> Content-Description: message body text
> > Hello, listers!
> > I hope those of you who are experts in kernel bugs or interaction of
kernel
> > with the hardware can help me with this. Since I installed Redhat 7.1 I
> > started to get the messages that RedHat cannot communicate through DMA
with
> > my hard drives. I know for sure that my hard drives can communicate
through
> > DMA, plus I was never getting similar messages before. Shon suggested
for
> > me to check whether UltraDMA support was compiled into my kernel, but I,
> > firstly, do not understand why it should be included into kernel, and
> > secondly, why would Redhat ignore including UltraDMA support in the
first
> > place.
> > Iam therefore attaching the complete log from the messages buffer ring
> > produced by the `dmesg' command.
> > Please let me know if you have any idea and where should I look for
> > possible solutions.
> > WIndows 2000 is very happy about my drives, whereas Linux complains
about
> > them. However, after kernel disables DMA transfer mode, it goes pretty
> > fine. Please ignore any messages about SWAP...
> > Best and thanks in advance,
> > Vic
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Kirk Wood]

On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> But why UltraDMA? Are DMA and UltraDMA much different from each other?

Actually they are. :) UltraDMA sounds so much better and sells way more
hardware. DMA is just a short form of UltraDMA. There was no DMA standard
prior to UDMA.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Gregory Nowak]

Don't quote me on this because I could be wrong,
but ultra dma is used for newer drives and newer motherboards. From your dmesg output,
it seems like your system is a good candidate for it.
Greg


On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 01:51:40AM +0200, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> But why UltraDMA? Are DMA and UltraDMA much different from each other?
> Vic
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gregory Nowak" <romualt@megsinet.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 11:16 PM
> Subject: Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors
> 
> 
> > Hi Vic,
> >
> > Yeah, I'd say also to check if you have ultra dma
> > support in your kernel.
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 10:44:19PM -0100, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> > Content-Description: message body text
> > > Hello, listers!
> > > I hope those of you who are experts in kernel bugs or interaction of
> kernel
> > > with the hardware can help me with this. Since I installed Redhat 7.1 I
> > > started to get the messages that RedHat cannot communicate through DMA
> with
> > > my hard drives. I know for sure that my hard drives can communicate
> through
> > > DMA, plus I was never getting similar messages before. Shon suggested
> for
> > > me to check whether UltraDMA support was compiled into my kernel, but I,
> > > firstly, do not understand why it should be included into kernel, and
> > > secondly, why would Redhat ignore including UltraDMA support in the
> first
> > > place.
> > > Iam therefore attaching the complete log from the messages buffer ring
> > > produced by the `dmesg' command.
> > > Please let me know if you have any idea and where should I look for
> > > possible solutions.
> > > WIndows 2000 is very happy about my drives, whereas Linux complains
> about
> > > them. However, after kernel disables DMA transfer mode, it goes pretty
> > > fine. Please ignore any messages about SWAP...
> > > Best and thanks in advance,
> > > Vic
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Kirk Wood]

> Yeah, I'd say also to check if you have ultra dma support in your kernel.

There is no need to check. The only possible way to have a problem with
UDMA access is to have UDMA support. If you don't have this compiled in
then you are using PIO mode. IF you do and it times out you are also in
PIO mode.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Kerry Hoath]

You may also find that certain drives want to go into udma66
which makes sense since that is their fastest powerup dma mode. Now if you don't happen
to have a UDMA66 cable, then you can experience dma timeouts or crc errors,
because Linux thinks the drive is in superfast mode, the drive does too but the signals on the cable
are getting corrupted due to the lack of conductors in the cable.
UDMA 66 has 80 conducters and normal ide has 40, although both only have 40 pins.

I found that with my Quantum 30gig drive, I couldn't enable dma reliably
unless I had an UDMA66 cable on the Via 82c586 controller. Some new
drives suck in pio mode providing a lack lustre 5 megabytes per second
but run at 15 megabytes when udma is enabled.
If anyone wants any more information on Linux and DMA/UDMA let me know under Linux,
sadly under Windows you'll have to ask Kirk Wood about the dark side :-)

Regards, Kerry.
On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 04:53:14PM -0500, Kirk Wood wrote:
> First, understand why Windows 2000 doesn't complain about the DMA. If the
> drive times out twice (ever) then it no longer uses DMA ever. So it won't
> complain. It won't tell you. In fact, win winclows 98 they burried any
> indication that this had happened. It happens more often them many people
> realize.
> 
> Having said that, if you didn't have DMA support compiled into the kernel
> you wouldn't get the errors. Yes, it must be compiled in if it is to be
> used. (DMA falls back to PIO in case of failure and PIO always remains
> available.)
> 
> As for fixing this, it is either the motherboard or the drive. I know that
> doesn't help. You might check to see that DMA is turned on in the
> BIOS. (Linux will try anyway, winblows just acts like it is using DMA and
> doesn't really.) Otherwise try another DMA drive and see if the problem
> resolves.
> 
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> 
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Kerry Hoath]

UDMA and UDMA 66/100 are different to dma, since Ultra DMA allows
data transferr rates to theoretically aproach 33mb/s and 66/100mb per second with the
other speeds. UDMA66 and faster need 80-wire cables.

Regards, Kerry.
On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 01:51:40AM +0200, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> But why UltraDMA? Are DMA and UltraDMA much different from each other?
> Vic
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gregory Nowak" <romualt@megsinet.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 11:16 PM
> Subject: Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors
> 
> 
> > Hi Vic,
> >
> > Yeah, I'd say also to check if you have ultra dma
> > support in your kernel.
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 10:44:19PM -0100, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> > Content-Description: message body text
> > > Hello, listers!
> > > I hope those of you who are experts in kernel bugs or interaction of
> kernel
> > > with the hardware can help me with this. Since I installed Redhat 7.1 I
> > > started to get the messages that RedHat cannot communicate through DMA
> with
> > > my hard drives. I know for sure that my hard drives can communicate
> through
> > > DMA, plus I was never getting similar messages before. Shon suggested
> for
> > > me to check whether UltraDMA support was compiled into my kernel, but I,
> > > firstly, do not understand why it should be included into kernel, and
> > > secondly, why would Redhat ignore including UltraDMA support in the
> first
> > > place.
> > > Iam therefore attaching the complete log from the messages buffer ring
> > > produced by the `dmesg' command.
> > > Please let me know if you have any idea and where should I look for
> > > possible solutions.
> > > WIndows 2000 is very happy about my drives, whereas Linux complains
> about
> > > them. However, after kernel disables DMA transfer mode, it goes pretty
> > > fine. Please ignore any messages about SWAP...
> > > Best and thanks in advance,
> > > Vic
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Kerry Hoath]

Linux won't enable u/dma on wd drives by default all the time, sometimes you
can force it and other times you just leave it be. Let me know how you go my WD
drives run fine in UDMA mode.
On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 12:14:09AM +0200, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> Hi, Kirk!
> That sheds some light. I will probably end up downloading a diag diskette
> for Western Digital drives and see whether they detect DMA capabilities. OK,
> if it turns out that I was fooled by Windows during all this time, do you
> know of any parameter which I could use to tell Linux to fall to PIO mode
> right away?
> Best,
> Victor
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kirk Wood" <cpt.kirk@1tree.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 11:53 PM
> Subject: Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors
> 
> 
> > First, understand why Windows 2000 doesn't complain about the DMA. If the
> > drive times out twice (ever) then it no longer uses DMA ever. So it won't
> > complain. It won't tell you. In fact, win winclows 98 they burried any
> > indication that this had happened. It happens more often them many people
> > realize.
> >
> > Having said that, if you didn't have DMA support compiled into the kernel
> > you wouldn't get the errors. Yes, it must be compiled in if it is to be
> > used. (DMA falls back to PIO in case of failure and PIO always remains
> > available.)
> >
> > As for fixing this, it is either the motherboard or the drive. I know that
> > doesn't help. You might check to see that DMA is turned on in the
> > BIOS. (Linux will try anyway, winblows just acts like it is using DMA and
> > doesn't really.) Otherwise try another DMA drive and see if the problem
> > resolves.
> >
> > =======
> > Kirk Wood
> > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> >
> > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Shaun Oliver]

I don't know why the kernel shouldn't include it but I thought you should
start there as that may have been the problem.
Anyone else got any suggestions as to vics problem?


Shaun..
"We realise we have a problem with communication. However, we're not going
to discuss it with our staff."
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Victor Tsaran wrote:

> Hello, listers!
> I hope those of you who are experts in kernel bugs or interaction of kernel
> with the hardware can help me with this. Since I installed Redhat 7.1 I
> started to get the messages that RedHat cannot communicate through DMA with
> my hard drives. I know for sure that my hard drives can communicate through
> DMA, plus I was never getting similar messages before. Shon suggested for
> me to check whether UltraDMA support was compiled into my kernel, but I,
> firstly, do not understand why it should be included into kernel, and
> secondly, why would Redhat ignore including UltraDMA support in the first
> place.
> Iam therefore attaching the complete log from the messages buffer ring
> produced by the `dmesg' command.
> Please let me know if you have any idea and where should I look for
> possible solutions.
> WIndows 2000 is very happy about my drives, whereas Linux complains about
> them. However, after kernel disables DMA transfer mode, it goes pretty
> fine. Please ignore any messages about SWAP...
> Best and thanks in advance,
> Vic
> 

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Shaun Oliver]

ultra dma for some reason is faster than dma.
Ultra dma has a start off running speed of 33 mhz and is supposed to make
disk access a lot faster. would be better if you had a dma 66
though. <grin>.


Shaun..
"We realise we have a problem with communication. However, we're not going
to discuss it with our staff."
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Victor Tsaran wrote:

> But why UltraDMA? Are DMA and UltraDMA much different from each other?
> Vic
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gregory Nowak" <romualt@megsinet.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 11:16 PM
> Subject: Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors
> 
> 
> > Hi Vic,
> >
> > Yeah, I'd say also to check if you have ultra dma
> > support in your kernel.
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 10:44:19PM -0100, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> > Content-Description: message body text
> > > Hello, listers!
> > > I hope those of you who are experts in kernel bugs or interaction of
> kernel
> > > with the hardware can help me with this. Since I installed Redhat 7.1 I
> > > started to get the messages that RedHat cannot communicate through DMA
> with
> > > my hard drives. I know for sure that my hard drives can communicate
> through
> > > DMA, plus I was never getting similar messages before. Shon suggested
> for
> > > me to check whether UltraDMA support was compiled into my kernel, but I,
> > > firstly, do not understand why it should be included into kernel, and
> > > secondly, why would Redhat ignore including UltraDMA support in the
> first
> > > place.
> > > Iam therefore attaching the complete log from the messages buffer ring
> > > produced by the `dmesg' command.
> > > Please let me know if you have any idea and where should I look for
> > > possible solutions.
> > > WIndows 2000 is very happy about my drives, whereas Linux complains
> about
> > > them. However, after kernel disables DMA transfer mode, it goes pretty
> > > fine. Please ignore any messages about SWAP...
> > > Best and thanks in advance,
> > > Vic
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Shaun Oliver]

you've gotta remember though kerry, that ultra dma isn't enabled by
default on dma66 or dma33 hard drives.
No wait a minute, it is but the running speed isn't set properly. it's
usually set to dma33 and you have to use a utility to enable dma66 for
some stupid reason.
You do under windows any way. not sure about linux.


Shaun..
"We realise we have a problem with communication. However, we're not going
to discuss it with our staff."
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Kerry Hoath wrote:

> You may also find that certain drives want to go into udma66
> which makes sense since that is their fastest powerup dma mode. Now if you don't happen
> to have a UDMA66 cable, then you can experience dma timeouts or crc errors,
> because Linux thinks the drive is in superfast mode, the drive does too but the signals on the cable
> are getting corrupted due to the lack of conductors in the cable.
> UDMA 66 has 80 conducters and normal ide has 40, although both only have 40 pins.
> 
> I found that with my Quantum 30gig drive, I couldn't enable dma reliably
> unless I had an UDMA66 cable on the Via 82c586 controller. Some new
> drives suck in pio mode providing a lack lustre 5 megabytes per second
> but run at 15 megabytes when udma is enabled.
> If anyone wants any more information on Linux and DMA/UDMA let me know under Linux,
> sadly under Windows you'll have to ask Kirk Wood about the dark side :-)
> 
> Regards, Kerry.
> On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 04:53:14PM -0500, Kirk Wood wrote:
> > First, understand why Windows 2000 doesn't complain about the DMA. If the
> > drive times out twice (ever) then it no longer uses DMA ever. So it won't
> > complain. It won't tell you. In fact, win winclows 98 they burried any
> > indication that this had happened. It happens more often them many people
> > realize.
> > 
> > Having said that, if you didn't have DMA support compiled into the kernel
> > you wouldn't get the errors. Yes, it must be compiled in if it is to be
> > used. (DMA falls back to PIO in case of failure and PIO always remains
> > available.)
> > 
> > As for fixing this, it is either the motherboard or the drive. I know that
> > doesn't help. You might check to see that DMA is turned on in the
> > BIOS. (Linux will try anyway, winblows just acts like it is using DMA and
> > doesn't really.) Otherwise try another DMA drive and see if the problem
> > resolves.
> > 
> > =======
> > Kirk Wood
> > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> > 
> > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> -- 
> --
> Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> ICQ UIN: 8226547
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Shaun Oliver]

here's one for u then kirk?
consider this.
intel pentium 4 processor. 1.4 gb running speed.
take a closer look, oh dear! only a 133 mhz front end bus!
but, amd athlon, 1.5 gb processor speed "BUT"! 266 mhz front end bus.
I know which one I'd prefer.


Shaun..
"We realise we have a problem with communication. However, we're not going
to discuss it with our staff."
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Kirk Wood wrote:

> On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> > ultra dma for some reason is faster than dma.
> 
> THere is a very good reason for this. It is that DMA was never
> marketed. Drives in PIO mode can use DMA transfer. But when the
> improvements for this were made, it was first marketed as "Ultra
> DMA." Something about making it sound bigger and better appeals to the
> marketing gurus. Perhaps it has something to do with most consumer's
> gulibility. Perhaps it is because they have seen computers with faster
> clock speeds out sell computers that do things faster.
> 
> Don't fall sucker to marketing. Consider that the Intel line has much
> higher speeds then does the Alpha processor. And yet, which gets more
> done? Same story happens when comparing the Apple hardware to Intel. You
> don't need as fast a processor for similar speed. And now the same crap is
> happening in macroslop pocket pc. Just friday I had some moron from compaq
> point out the higher clock speeds and more memory of the pocket pc in
> reference to the palms. Then I asked if they worked faster. "Well, no but
> still...."
> 
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> 
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Kirk Wood]

On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 12:14:09AM +0200, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> OK, if it turns out that I was fooled by Windows during all this time,
> do you know of any parameter which I could use to tell Linux to fall to
> PIO mode right away?

One way to keep it from ever going into UDMA mode is to remove the support
in the kernel. If you don't compile it in, it won't kick in. (Yes, it can
work on the obvious.) Regardless of the settings, the standard macroslop
and intel have pushed is that the drive starts in PIO mode at boot and
switches when the 32 bit drivers send the signal.

The better cables could be a large factor. I would recomend going with the
shortest possible and if you only use one drive, get a cable without the
connector for the second drive. The second conductor is there to help keep
the good signal in the cable and the bad signal out of the cable. 

When looking at the performance issues, the reality is that you will only
see a morginal increase in speed. While UDMA raises the speed of data
transfer across the wire considerably, this will only happen if the data
requested is in the hardware cache of the drive (and all drives have
this). If there is a miss, or sustained transfer the rate will max out
arround 7 MB per second. (This lower rate is the rate of transfer to and
from the medium.) This is why RAID can increas speeds so dramatically. It
will read the data from multiple drives at once.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Kirk Wood]

On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> ultra dma for some reason is faster than dma.

THere is a very good reason for this. It is that DMA was never
marketed. Drives in PIO mode can use DMA transfer. But when the
improvements for this were made, it was first marketed as "Ultra
DMA." Something about making it sound bigger and better appeals to the
marketing gurus. Perhaps it has something to do with most consumer's
gulibility. Perhaps it is because they have seen computers with faster
clock speeds out sell computers that do things faster.

Don't fall sucker to marketing. Consider that the Intel line has much
higher speeds then does the Alpha processor. And yet, which gets more
done? Same story happens when comparing the Apple hardware to Intel. You
don't need as fast a processor for similar speed. And now the same crap is
happening in macroslop pocket pc. Just friday I had some moron from compaq
point out the higher clock speeds and more memory of the pocket pc in
reference to the palms. Then I asked if they worked faster. "Well, no but
still...."

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Victor Tsaran]

OK, guys, I started to see these errors only after I installed Redhat7.1. Is
that possible that earlier versions of Redhat kernel didn't have UDMA
support compiled in?

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Victor Tsaran]

Hi, Kerry!
How would I tell Linux kernel not to kick into DMA mode without recompiling?
Best,
Vic

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[John Covici]

Also, make sure that your specific chip set support is enabled in the
kernel -- for the 2.2 kernels you will need the ide patch (look in
people/hedrick in your nearest mirror) and its even a good idea for
the 2.4 kernels.  This supports the dma much better.

Kerry Hoath <kerry@gotss.eu.org> writes:

> You may also find that certain drives want to go into udma66
> which makes sense since that is their fastest powerup dma mode. 

-- 
         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Victor Tsaran]

Bill, did you notice anything similar to my experience after installing
Redhat7.1?
Best,
Vic

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Covici" <covici@ccs.covici.com>
To: <speakup@speech.braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors


> Also, make sure that your specific chip set support is enabled in the
> kernel -- for the 2.2 kernels you will need the ide patch (look in
> people/hedrick in your nearest mirror) and its even a good idea for
> the 2.4 kernels.  This supports the dma much better.
>
> Kerry Hoath <kerry@gotss.eu.org> writes:
>
> > You may also find that certain drives want to go into udma66
> > which makes sense since that is their fastest powerup dma mode.
>
> --
>          John Covici
>          covici@ccs.covici.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: A more complete log about my disk access errors

[Kerry Hoath]

Read /usr/src/linux/Documentation/ide.txt you can
pass an ide0= parameter something like
ide0=noautotune but don't quote me on it.
On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 04:12:04PM +0200, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> Hi, Kerry!
> How would I tell Linux kernel not to kick into DMA mode without recompiling?
> Best,
> Vic
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547