On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 11:33 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On 04/06/2010 11:28 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > If a system vendor puts its own name or model numbers on the disks it > > ships then I think the BIOS or other platform firmware can reasonably > > assume that it 'owns' and can write to the HPA on a disk with the > > vendor's identification. (I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that > > some vendors take shortcuts though.) > > I would be very surprised if no vendor took shortcuts. :-) > > >> Ah... I see, but let's fix that up too. It could be worse to have > >> half working workaround than not working around at all. I'll update > >> the patch once the currently pending HPA updates are in. > > > > Oh, what are those? > > The patch I posted is rolled up version which contained currently > pending HPA unlock on shrink patch. > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/45662 It sounds like that should go to stable as well. > > I want to apply some version of this fix in Debian soon so we can > > complete the transition to libata. I would very much appreciate it if > > you could answer whether or not the multiple 'capacity change' messages > > may indicate a problem. > > Multiple messages are probably sd doing revalidation of the device. I > don't think it will cause any problem but I'll look into it later > today and let you know. What did you find? Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part