From owner-freebsd-scsi Wed Apr 14 12:22:11 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from panzer.plutotech.com (panzer.plutotech.com [206.168.67.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E75E614F01; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 12:22:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ken@panzer.plutotech.com) Received: (from ken@localhost) by panzer.plutotech.com (8.9.3/8.8.5) id NAA02152; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 13:19:43 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kenneth D. Merry" Message-Id: <199904141919.NAA02152@panzer.plutotech.com> Subject: Re: timed out while idle? In-Reply-To: <199904141818.UAA42196@rt2.synx.com> from Remy Nonnenmacher at "Apr 14, 1999 8:18:32 pm" To: remy@synx.com Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 13:19:43 -0600 (MDT) Cc: asami@FreeBSD.ORG, scsi@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Remy Nonnenmacher wrote... > On 13 Apr, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > > * From: "Kenneth D. Merry" > > > > * The timed out while idle message means that the drive took longer than the > > * timeout (60 seconds) to respond to a read or write request, and nothing was > > * going on on the bus at the time. In other words, your drive went out to > > * lunch, and we hit it with a BDR to get it to come back. > > > > Wow, 60 seconds? That's indeed a pretty good lunch. :) > > > > * Yep. There's a timeout for each transaction. If the transaction doesn't > > * complete in the specified period of time (60 seconds for disk > > * reads/writes), the timeout fires, a BDR is sent and all transactions that > > * were queued to the disk are requeued. > > > > I see. By the way, can any of these cause panics? Here's an example: > > > > If that can serve: I got _exactly_ the same problem on one machine that > was otherwise stable for months. It turned out that updating adpatec > BIOS (1.23 and 1.32 to 1.34.2) and disabling auto-termination solved the > problem. Unfortunetly, i can't say what of the two actions fixed this > for me since i made the two at the same time. I would guess the latter. Sometimes, especially for on-board chips, using automatic termination may not work properly. In those cases, it's better to explicitly specify what kind of termination you want. Ken -- Kenneth Merry ken@plutotech.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message