Minor bug in kernel HD detection?

Minor bug in kernel HD detection?

Post by Marcus Sundber » Thu, 30 Oct 1997 04:00:00



I've just bought a nice 4.3GB Fujitsu Ultra DMA-33 IDE drive,
and when booting Linux tells me that it has 0kB of cache instead
of the supposedly 128kB. This happens both with kernel 2.0.0
and 2.1.58.
The question is why? The drive is real new (manufactured in september
'97) so it might be that it has some new features (like the ultra dma
stuff maybe) that confuses Linux so that it can't detect the cache.

Has anyone else experienced a harddrive reporting 0kB cache in Linux,
or is this drive simply broken?

//Marcus
--
-------------------------------+-------------------------------------
        Marcus Sundberg        | WWW: http://www.e.kth.se/~e94_msu/
 Royal Institute of Technology |             E-Mail:

 
 
 

Minor bug in kernel HD detection?

Post by Perry Gri » Thu, 30 Oct 1997 04:00:00




> I've just bought a nice 4.3GB Fujitsu Ultra DMA-33 IDE drive,
> and when booting Linux tells me that it has 0kB of cache instead
> of the supposedly 128kB. This happens both with kernel 2.0.0
> and 2.1.58.

> Has anyone else experienced a harddrive reporting 0kB cache
> in Linux, or is this drive simply broken?

> //Marcus

I posted a very similar Q (perhaps w/out world distribution)
in c.o.l.hardware a few days ago.  It seems Seagate Fast ATA-2
drives exhibit this same characteristic.  A 2.1G Seagate ATA
drive has detected cache, a 3.2G Seagate Fast ATA-2 has the
no cache "problem".  I talked with a friend who has a newer
Seagate drive says he sees the 0 k as well.

As there was someone else with the same characteristic, I
assumed my new drive was ok and have kept it.  However, this
still doesn't answer "why".  And I am by no means qualified
as kernel hacking IDE guru able to answer this question.

Perry Grieb

PS:  Marcus, if you get a good answer, I would be most grateful
     for an e-mail back!
--

Perry Grieb

Special of the week: SPAM proofread for $500 per message.

 
 
 

Minor bug in kernel HD detection?

Post by Boszormenyi Zolta » Sat, 01 Nov 1997 04:00:00



> Has anyone else experienced a harddrive reporting 0kB cache in Linux,
> or is this drive simply broken?

I've seen some reports on some Seagate eide drives that report
0kB cache as well. The drive reports falsely its cache size.
It may be a firmware bug (or feature :))


 
 
 

Minor bug in kernel HD detection?

Post by M. Buchenried » Thu, 06 Nov 1997 04:00:00




>> Has anyone else experienced a harddrive reporting 0kB cache in Linux,
>> or is this drive simply broken?
>I've seen some reports on some Seagate eide drives that report
>0kB cache as well. The drive reports falsely its cache size.
>It may be a firmware bug (or feature :))

I encountered this behaviour with a Seagate ST31277A MediaList drive.
It was broken from the very first day of operation. I exchanged it
with a standard 31220A drive which has been running happily since day 1.

Michael
--

**************************************************************************
Satellite Safety Tip #4:
                If you see a bright streak in the sky coming at you, duck.

 
 
 

Minor bug in kernel HD detection?

Post by Benoit Branciar » Fri, 07 Nov 1997 04:00:00





> >> Has anyone else experienced a harddrive reporting 0kB cache in Linux,
> >> or is this drive simply broken?

> >I've seen some reports on some Seagate eide drives that report
> >0kB cache as well. The drive reports falsely its cache size.
> >It may be a firmware bug (or feature :))

> I encountered this behaviour with a Seagate ST31277A MediaList drive.
> It was broken from the very first day of operation. I exchanged it
> with a standard 31220A drive which has been running happily since day 1.

I encountered this behaviour with a Fujitsu 3.5GB drive. Other programs
which issue IDE inquiry command, such as DOS-based system info
utilities, report the same thing. It seems to be a drive firmware
feature, and has no impact on drive performance.