| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I tried these kernels (all vanilla): |
| 4 |
> 2.6.32.13 |
| 5 |
> 2.6.33.5 |
| 6 |
> 2.6.34.0 |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
So it's not a known problem that has been fixed. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Just a wild guess... can you try recompiling the kernel *without* |
| 11 |
pata_via? Some people have reported having problems with sata drives on |
| 12 |
VIA controllers when pata_via is also loaded. If you need to access |
| 13 |
devices on the PATA ports, you can use the the old non-libata via82cxxx |
| 14 |
IDE driver. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> This is, what I cut from the dmegs out (I hope to get all relevant |
| 17 |
> infos...if you missing something, I save the complete dmesg output to |
| 18 |
> disk for later refrence...): |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
This is just the controller initialization part, it does not include the |
| 21 |
actual information about the drives. Look for something like "ata1: SATA |
| 22 |
link up..." a bit further in the log. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> fdisk -cu -S 56 /dev/sda |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Well, fdisk -cu defaults to creating the first partition beginning at |
| 27 |
sector 2048, which is fine as it's divisible by 8 (and thus is aligned |
| 28 |
on a 4096-byte boundary). I don't think you need to specify the number |
| 29 |
of sectors per track. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
But this is not really relevant, as creating unaligned partitions merely |
| 32 |
results in lower performance, not DMA errors :) |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> Do I have to replace my motherboard/graphics card/RAM/... |
| 35 |
> only because WD cannot talk to and/or vice versa? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
If the pata_via trick above does not work, and an upgrade is out of |
| 38 |
question, my suggestion is to find a cheap PCI sata2 controller and to |
| 39 |
use that instead of the on-board sata ports. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
> Can I use PCI cards on newer motherboards with PCIe-slots??? |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
You cannot use PCI cards in PCIe slots, but most new motherboards still |
| 44 |
have at least one PCI slot. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
andrea |
Archives