Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 10:55:35 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= <sos@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Victor Balada Diaz <victor@bsdes.net> Cc: "Andrey V. Elsukov" <bu7cher@yandex.ru>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [ATA] and re(4) stability issues Message-ID: <A8284393-C4E8-4E7D-9ADF-F8270C354E13@FreeBSD.ORG> In-Reply-To: <20081210091107.GC1320@alf.bsdes.net> References: <20081209185236.GA1320@alf.bsdes.net> <493F84A4.1080308@yandex.ru> <20081210091107.GC1320@alf.bsdes.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10Dec, 2008, at 10:11 , Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
>
> Thanks for explaining me what the flags do. I'm not skilled enough =20
> to create
> the DMA quirks but if you could give me some patches i'll test them. =20=
> Also
> if you have any other idea on what could i test or how can i debug =20
> this
> it would be more than welcome.
Comment out the following two lines in ata_ahci_dmainit():
if (ATA_INL(ctlr->r_res2, ATA_AHCI_CAP) & ATA_AHCI_CAP_64BIT)
ch->dma->max_address =3D BUS_SPACE_MAXADDR;
And you will not use 64bit DMA even if the chipset supports it. =20
However I have not seen any chipsets supporting this fail, YMMV as =20
usual :)
-S=F8ren
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A8284393-C4E8-4E7D-9ADF-F8270C354E13>